2nd COPY, 
1898. 






«€/ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. 

^srrr-n— 

pyright 
ShelfJ&g, 



Chap, „ Copyright No. 



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 




Famous Women of Sacred Story ; 

the Old and New 
Testament. Two 
Volumes ; Each a 
Series of Sixteen 
Popular Lectures, 
faithful delineations 
and pen pictures of 
the most noted 
characters in His- 
tory. The good and 
evil traits in these 
famous women are 
made to read a 
salutatory lesson to 
their sisters of the 
present day, em- 
phasizing reverent 
faith in the Bible, 
rather than the new 
versions of " wo- 
man's rights." By 
Rev.M.B. Wharton, 
D.D. Beautifully 
Each, $1.50. 

Historical and Patriotic Addresses, 

Centennial and Quad- 
rennial, comprising up- 
wards of one hundred 
select orations and 
poems, delivered in 
every State of the Union 
on the one hundredth 
anniversary of American 
Independence, by Hon. 
Wm. M. Evarts, Rev. 
Dr. Storrs, H.W.Beech- 
er, Charles F. Adams, 
Robert C. Winthrop, 
Horatio Seymour, Geo. 
Wm. Curtis, Chaunccy 
M. Depew, and others, 
— issued under the aus- 
pices of the respective 

authors. . Including the most noted Columbian 
dresses of 1892-93. Edited by F. Saunders, A.M., 
Librarian of Astor Library. 1048 octavo p, $3.50. 



illustrated. 318 and 340 pages. 




E. B TREAT & CO., 211-243 W, 23d St., Hew York 



BIBLE DIFFICULTIES 



Old Testament 



BIBLE DIFFICULTIES 



AND THEIR 



Alleviative Interpretation 



BY / 

ROBERT STUART MacARTHUR 

Pastor of Calvary Baptist Church, New York 



©to Seetament 



NEW YORK 

E. B. TREAT & COMPANY 

241-243 West 23D Street 

1899 






19649 



Copyright, 1898 

By E. B. TREAT & COMPANY 

New York 



nWCOMES DECEIVED. 







PREFACE 



During the past few months, the substance of 
the chapters comprising this volume was deliv- 
ered in addresses on consecutive Sunday evenings 
in the regular course of the author's ministry in 
the Calvary Baptist Church. He has long felt 
that most of the difficulties generally supposed to 
be in the Bible are not really in the Bible ; but 
are in the human interpretation of the Bible, 
rather than in the divine revelation itself. It is 
vastly important to separate between erroneous 
biblical exposition and the actual truth of divine 
revelation. 

The newer scholarship, it will readily be ad- 
mitted, has disturbed the faith of some Bible stu- 
dents; but it is absolutely certain that it has 
given the Bible a fresh interest and an increased 
value. It is not necessary to accept all the con- 
clusions of the so-called Higher Critics ; indeed, 
these conclusions are often at variance with one 
another, and more careful criticism will entirely 
refute some of the positions taken. But we can 
readily see that the later criticism has done much 
to disabuse the minds of some readers of their 
traditional interpretations and unauthoritative 
preconceptions of Holy Scripture; and, as a re- 
sult, the Bible was never so new and so attractive 
a library as it is at this hour. It never was so 



io PREFACE. 

carefully studied as now ; and it never has been to 
the church or to the race the blessing which it 
will be in the near future. The aim of these dis- 
courses is to separate between false interpreta- 
tion and genuine revelation. Miracles which God 
performs we unquestioningly receive; miracles 
which men imagine we are free to accept or re- 
ject. 

This volume contains a selection rather than a 
collection of difficulties in the Old-Testament 
Scriptures. Questions asked by members of the 
author's congregation, and by correspondents in 
different parts of the country, partly guided him 
in his selection of the difficulties discussed. 
Doubtless, many passages of Scripture which are 
serious difficulties to the minds of some readers 
have been omitted ; but it was not possible to in- 
clude all within the limits of a volume of con- 
venient size. Still it is believed that the most 
serious difficulties are here discussed. The au- 
thor regrets that these discussions do not more 
fully combine the results of the latest and most 
reverent scholarship with the spirit of sincere 
love to the Holy Book and its divine Author. Of 
his failures in all respects he is distinctly and 
deeply conscious; nevertheless, he hopes that as 
these discussions have proved helpful to many 
hearers, and also to his own spiritual faith and 
life, they may be blessed in the wider circle to 
which, through this volume, they are now intro- 
duced. This is his sincere desire and earnest 
prayer as this volume goes forth. 

Calvary Study, New York City, 
October, 1898. 



CONTENTS 



Chapter Page 

I. Was there Really Light Before the Sun? . . 13 

II. Was the World Made in Six Solar Days ? . . 25 

III. Where and What was the Garden of Eden ? . 39 

IV. What were the Sin and Sentence in Eden? . 53 

V. What was Cain's Mark, and Who was his Wife? 69 

VI. Who were the Sons of God and the Daughters 

of Men? 87 

VII. Does God Repent and the Spirit Withdraw? . 107 

VIII. Was the Noachian Flood Universal or Local? . 125 

IX. What was the Purpose of the Tower of Babel? 145 

X. Was Lot Wise in Pitching his Tent toward 

Sodom? 163 

XI. Who was Melchizedek, the Mysterious King- 
Priest? 179 

XII. Was the Destruction of Sodom Natural or Su- 
pernatural? 197 

XIII. Did God Mean that Abraham Should Really 

Offer Isaac? 217 

XIV. Did Rebekah and Jacob Cheat Isaac and Rob 

Esau? 235 

XV. Who was the Wrestler with Jacob at Jabbok? . 253 
XVI. Did God or Pharaoh Harden Pharaoh's Heart? 269 



I 2 CONTENTS. 

Chapter Page 

XVII. Was the Passage of the Red Sea Supernatural? 287 

XVIII. What were the Symbols called the Urim and 

Thummim? 305 

XIX. Did Balaam's Ass Literally Speak with Man's 

Voice? ........ 327 

XX. Did the Sun and Moon Stand Still at Joshua's 

Command? 345 

XXI. Did Jephthah Really Sacrifice his Daughter? . 359 

XXII. Did Samuel Appear when Summoned by the 

Witch of Endor? 373 

XXIII. Did Two She-bears Destroy Forty-two Chil- 

dren? 389 

XXIV. Was the Destruction of the Canaanites Vin- 

dicable ? 405 

XXV. Are the Imprecatory Psalms Justifiable or even 

Explicable? 417 

XXVI. Are the Prophet Jonah and the Great Fish His- 
torical? 435 



I. 

WAS THERE REALLY LIGHT BEFORE THE 

SUN? 



WAS THERE REALLY LIGHT BEFORE 
THE SUN? 

Truly sublime are the opening words of Gene- 
sis. No other historical writing approaches its 
first verse in grandeur and majesty. It implies 
the existence, the eternity, the freedom, the om- 
nipotence, the intelligence, and the goodness of 
God. The first sentence denies atheism, for it 
assumes God. It denies materialism, for it as- 
serts Creation. It denies pantheism, for it declares 
the personality of God. The word bar a, trans- 
lated " created," is one of three words, the others 
being yatsar and asa/i, used in this section, and 
bar a always has God for its subject, whatever its 
object may be. Yatsar, formed, and asa/i, made, 
both refer to construction out of pre-existing ma- 
terials, and both are predicable of God and man. 
The verb bara, in its simple form, occurs forty- 
eight times, according to Dr. Murphy, and always 
in one sense. The word "Elohim," translated 
God, is found in the Hebrew Scriptures fifty- 
seven times in the singular, and about three thou- 
sand times in the plural, according to the same 
authority. In the plural it may mean the " Eter- 
nal Powers," but it is correctly translated God. 
Later references will be made to the significance 



1 6 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

of its plural form, conjoined with verbs and ad- 
jectives in the singular, being thus somewhat of 
an anomaly in language, and giving a suggestion 
of the doctrine of the unity of the Godhead, 
which was later fully revealed. 

In the preceding verses the inspired writer de- 
scribed the condition of the world while in its 
chaotic state. Now he enters on the details of 
that stupendous process by which the whole was 
reduced to order, and the heavens and the earth 
were made to appear in their beauty and glory. 
The great secret of the entire process is the being 
and the power of God. Remove God from this 
lofty history, this noble poem, this sublime an- 
them, this glorious oratorio of primeval wisdom 
and goodness, and you have nothing left behind 
but darkness, mystery, and chaos. Insert God in 
the history, and all becomes perfectly reasonable, 
and partially explicable. Every thoughtful man 
must admit that there is far less mystery and 
difficulty with, than without, God. Eliminate 
God, and you eliminate reason as well as faith. 
Atheism has no explanation to give of Creation ; 
it leaves the whole subject involved in impene- 
trable darkness and hopeless mystery. Admit 
God, and the hymn of Creation has beauty, maj- 
esty, and glory. Thus it comes to pass that " God 
said" is the keynote to this sublime song. This 
word of God removes all ideas of blind force and 
senseless matter. Thus it is that God's presence 
and power in the first majestic words of Genesis 



WAS THERE LIGHT BEFORE THE SUN? 17 

answer a thousand questions of the human mind 
and heart. Past all the works of Creation we 
must go to the person of God as the divine 
Author. 

God Not Eliminated. 

Behind the visible universe stands God. Men 
talk of the laws of nature. What do they mean? 
What is a law? A law is only a name which we 
give to the manner in which we have observed 
some force to act. If the force be physical, we 
have a physical law; if moral, we have a moral 
law. A law is not a force, but a form; not a 
motor, but a motion; not a power, but a process. 
Law implies a lawgiver, evolution an evolver, or- 
der an ordainer. There stands God. We have 
often permitted ourselves to be confused as to the 
true definition of law. We have allowed our- 
selves to think of law as if it were endowed with 
power and possessed of personality. Even if evo- 
lution were fully established, it would not elimi- 
nate God. Nothing can be evolved that has not 
first been involved. There stands God. Back of 
all processes is God as the almighty power. But 
how are we to understand the words " and God 
said"? Did God literally utter His voice in that 
primeval solitude? Did His voice echo through 
that chaotic abyss? This we cannot suppose. 
We have here an example of the application to 
God of terms which usually are applied to human 
beings. In this way the Bible often speaks of 



iS OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

God's face, ear, hand, and voice. In harmony 
with this usage the Bible speaks of God as repent- 
ing and as performing other acts characteristic of 
man. This usage is what the theologians call an 
example of anthropomorphism. If God is to 
communicate with men He must adopt methods 
which men can understand, and if men are to 
speak of God, they must use the only language 
which it is possible for them to employ. " God's 
speaking is His willing, and His willing is His 
doing." This is the first time that the phrase 
" God said" is used in this narrative, but it is used 
in all ten times in the account of the creation. It 
is also a characteristic form of expression in the 
Old Testament. We have it in such forms as 
"God spake, saying," "Thus saith the Lord of 
hosts," and such other expressions as " the word of 
the Lord came, saying." 

On reading the first chapter of Genesis we are 
reminded of the first chapter of John's Gospel, 
" In the beginning was the Word." Observe the 
similarity between these two great opening chap- 
ters. What is the irresistible conclusion? The 
" God-said" of the Old Testament is the God-word 
of the New Testament. The Jehovah of the Old 
Testament is the Jesus of the New Testament. 
In John we further read that Jesus made all 
things which were made. At this point also the 
two records harmonize. In Genesis we have the 
majestic words, " Let there be light, and there 
was light"; or, more literally, "Light be, and 



WAS THERE LIGHT BEFORE THE SUN? 1 9 

light was." The sublimity of these words in the 
original cannot be fully reproduced in English. 
It appears more completely in the Greek of the 
Seventy and in the Latin Vulgate. Longinus, 
the famous Platonic philosopher and finished rhe- 
torician, born at Athens or in Syria, about 213 
a.d., a student in Alexandria and filially a teacher 
in Athens, the man whose knowledge was so great 
and varied and his critical taste so acute that he 
was called a "living library" and a " walking mu- 
seum," refers to these words as an illustration of 
his theme when writing of the Sublime. The 
Eternal Word speaks, and light is. Finely has 
Dr. George Dana Boardman said: "Man's words 
are but sounds, God's words are deeds. He but 
speaks, and lo! light, sky, ocean, mountain, tree, 
animal, man, star, universe. He spake, and it 
was; He commanded, and it stood fast." 

Light before the Sun. 

But just here a difficulty arises. Whenever the 
mind of the Infinite comes into contact with the 
finite, an insoluble problem emerges. The finite 
can apprehend, but cannot comprehend the In- 
finite. Now we know God, not as He is, but as 
we are. Now at best we see through a glass 
darkly. Could there have been light before the 
sun's creation? Can there be any alleviative ex- 
planation? Assuredly there can. We are told 
that the sun is the primary source of light, and, 



20 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

in a measure, the statement is true. We are 
now, let it be borne in mind, in the first day of 
Creation, but when we reach the fourth day we 
are told that God made the sun. We immediately 
ask, " How, then, could there have been light on 
the first day?" At this point many are embar- 
rassed and some are staggered. I well remember 
how I once was puzzled because of this apparent 
contradiction in the inspired narrative. Sceptics 
quickly seized upon these statements as if they 
were the result of crass ignorance on the part of 
the writer of the Creation records. As early as 
the days of Celsus, who lived in the second cen- 
tury after Christ, and wrote about 150 a.d., this 
objection to the Mosiac record of the Creation 
was urged. But in wonderful ways have the au- 
thoritative conclusions of science come forward as 
witnesses to the truth of this sacred story. 

Let us look at some of the explanations which 
have been offered. Some say that the sun was 
created at the first a perfectly luminous body, 
but that the vapors arising from the condition of 
the world at the time shut out his light, and that 
when God said, " Let there be light," He simply 
dispersed these mists and vapors and thus caused 
the light of the sun to be seen. They thus make 
the light only a manifestation of what was pre- 
viously in existence, and not the creation of some- 
thing which until then had no existence. But they 
have still to account for the creation of the sun, 
or at least for the narrative touching that point in 



WAS THERE LIGHT BE TORE THE SUN? 21 

the history of the fourth day. This they do by 
supposing that there we have not the account of 
the sun's creation, but only the record of the 
command that the sun was appointed to rule by 
day. Augustine thought that this was simply 
spiritual light; and Calvin recognized the dis- 
tinction between this light and that mentioned in 
connection with the creation of the sun, but he 
had no very clear explanation to give. But the 
narrative tells us not simply that light began to 
be visible, but it asserts that light began to be; 
and it seems certain that the majestic language 
here attributed to Elohim is too lofty and sublime 
to be applied to so comparatively unimportant an 
event as the scattering of the mists and clouds. 
Here comparatively late discoveries, or at least 
applications, of scientific knowledge come for- 
ward to solve the problem. We know that light 
was once supposed to be a distinct element or 
substance ; but now it is believed to be simply a 
mode or condition of matter. Thus it is now 
known that the light-giving qualities of many 
bodies are due to their condition of incandescence. 
It is certainly known that light is not entirely de- 
pendent on the sun. No one who is at all familiar 
with the subject now doubts that there is a kind 
and degree of light apart from the sun ; and it is cer- 
tain that this chemical or cosmical light possesses 
some qualities conducive to the growth of vegeta- 
tion. It is beyond any question true that " any 
solid body can be rendered incandescent by being 



22 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

heated up to between 700 and 8oo° Fahrenheit," 
and liquids also which are capable of being heated 
up to the required degree emit light. We know 
also that fire-flies, certain kinds of wood, and still 
other substances in their normal condition, throw 
out light. We know, indeed, that there are many 
theories as to the phenomenon of light, but much 
connected with it is still wrapped in mystery. It 
travels much faster tham sound. When a cannon 
is fired at a distance w r e first see the flash and then 
later hear the sound. Light travels 186,000 miles 
a second, or more than a million times faster than 
sound. It therefore takes the light of the sun 
eight minutes to travel from the sun to the earth. 
Light travels farther as well as faster than sound ; 
in proof of this statement is the familiar fact 
that we often see lightning so far off that we 
cannot hear the thunder which accompanies it at 
the point of its origin. But much as we know of 
it, it still has its mysteries. The Pythagorean 
and Newtonian theory was that light was trans- 
mitted to the eye by the emission of small parti- 
cles of luminous matter. This is called the emis- 
sion corpuscular theory. The earlier theory made 
light an attenuated, imponderable substance ; the 
undulatory theory makes light to be propagated 
by the vibrations of matter called ether. These 
theories were long rivals, but the undulatory 
theory lias completely triumphed over the other. 

Professor Dana affirms that the wave lengths 
in the vibration of molecular force have been as- 



WAS THERE LIGHT BEFORE THE SUN? 23 

certained. He also reminds us that the laws of 
heat and of electrical and chemical action are so 
involved with those of light that all these condi- 
tions are convertible and one in molecular origin. 
The nebular hypothesis of La Place, who stood 
second to none but Newton in the great science 
of mathematical astronomy, asserts that the con- 
densation of the originally void, dark, gaseous 
chaos would be accompanied by intense molecular 
or chemcial activity, and so would assuredly emit 
light. Infidelity called Moses a blunderer and 
the Bible a fraud for affirming that there was 
light before the sun ; and now all the scientists 
declare that this very result must have occurred. 
Moses was no scientist ; he lived in an age when 
nothing was known of molecular activity. He 
never heard of Newton or La Place ; he could not 
have understood the nebular hypothesis if he had 
heard of it. How came he to anticipate the con- 
clusions of modern science? God taught him ; he 
was inspired of the Almighty. Let infidelity be 
dumb ; let it hide its empty head. God taught 
Moses, and Moses teaches the scientists of the 
nineteenth century. In medicine, as in astron- 
omy, Moses is abreast of the science of to-day. 
Regarding all sanitary laws, the medical profes- 
sion of to-day is only struggling up to the point 
reached by Moses ages ago. Who taught Moses? 
The Almighty. How came the cosmogony of 
Moses to be right, according to the latest dicta of 
science, while the cosmogonies of all heathen na- 



24 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

tions excite the laughter of all scientific men to- 
day? There stands God. It is high time for a 
shallow atheism to be entirely silent, or to speak 
with great modesty. Let all believers in divine 
revelation rejoice in God's Word, the glorious old 
Bible, which God is magnifying in the halls of 
scientific learning, in the homes of devout be- 
lievers, and in the churches of Jesus Christ 
throughout the world! 



II. 

WAS THE WORLD MADE IN SIX DAYS? 



II. 

WAS THE WORLD MADE IN SIX DAYS? 

In Genesis, the first chapter and the fifth verse, 
our attention is called to the first day in the his- 
tory of Creation. In the same verse we are told 
that God called the light day, and the darkness 
night. We need not be surprised that God gave 
names to the things which He had created. The 
names given to things by us express the impres- 
sion which they have made upon our minds ; but 
the names given by God express the nature of 
the things to which they are given. It seems cer- 
tain that God, in naming the day and the night, had 
reference to their phenomena rather than to their 
duration. The names were not for the benefit of 
men when first given, as there were no human 
beings then to make use of the names which God 
gave ; but these names were rather a declaration 
of the qualities or nature of the things to which 
they were applied. It is still true that, in a real 
sense, " words are things." We may be abso- 
lutely certain that there was a significance in the 
words employed by God, which made it fitting 
that they should be applied to the things which 
He made. We cannot, for a moment, suppose 
that the name given to one object could with 



28 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

equal propriety have been given to another. But 
it must be admitted that there is still much uncer- 
tainty as to the etymology of the words which 
God employed. The Hebrew word translated 
day is yom % and the word translated night is la- 
ycla. These names, let it be borne in mind, were 
descriptions of nature rather than measures of 
time. 

Some scholars suggest that yom expresses " the 
tumult, stir, and business of the day. " Those who 
give it this meaning probably connect it with the 
word yam y which depicts the boiling or foaming 
of the sea. They make layela refer to " the yell- 
ing or howling of wild beasts at night," and so 
connect it with the Latin ululate. But probably 
Gesenius and others are more nearly correct in 
deriving the word yom from a root meaning " to 
be warm, to glow with heat." This derivation 
makes it analogous to the Arabic, yahina, to glow 
with anger. It has been well said that in a sultry 
climate, like that of the East, this would be a suit- 
able description of the day to distinguish it from 
the night. Gesenius and other Hebrew scholars 
associate the word for night with the rare Hebrew 
root /?//, meaning to roll up; and the idea sug- 
gested is that night rolls up or wraps all things in 
the curtains of obscurity and darkness. We may 
be quite sure that there was entire appropriate- 
ness in the terms applied by God to the day and 
the night. God has a reason, doubtless, for every 
name He gives and for every act He performs ; and 



WAS THE WORLD MADE IN SIX DAYS? 29 

whether or not we fully understand the etymology 
of these words, we may be sure that they point out 
the distinguishing peculiarities of the objects to 
which they are applied. A similar remark will 
apply to the names given to the heavens and the 
earth, to the sea and to the dry land, and to all 
the other objects named in the account of Crea- 
tion. 

We read in the latter part of this fifth verse, 
" And the evening and the morning were the first 
day. " The more literal translation is, " And even- 
ing was, and morning was, day one. " Because the 
darkness preceded the light, the evening is prob- 
ably mentioned first ; and it is likely that for this 
reason the Jews began their day of twenty-four 
hours from the evening. There has always been 
some difference of opinion as to the exact mean- 
ing of the language here used. Some have 
affirmed that we have here an ordinary solar day 
of twenty-four hours. This, it is claimed, is -the 
natural meaning of the language here employed ; 
and the words of the fourth commandment are 
quoted to show that here we have simply an ordi- 
nary astronomical day. But some who so affirm 
reckon the day from daybreak to daybreak, while 
others reckon it from sunset to sunset. 

Meaning of "One." 

Let us look carefully into the Scriptural use of 
the two words " day one. " Let us entirely free our 
minds from any real or supposed necessity, as the 



30 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

result of modern scientific discovery in geology or 
any other science, to understand the word " day" 
as meaning a period of indefinite duration. Let 
us, without prejudice one way or the other, get 
the heart meaning and the Scriptural usage of 
these two words translated in our version " first 
day" and more literally "day one." The two 
words in Hebrew are yom % day, and ahad, one. 
The numeral " one " is several times used in Scrip- 
ture when clearly it means certain, peculiar, special, 
unique. It is in these passages used in the sense 
of the Latin quidam. Thus we have the word in 
Daniel viii. 3 : " Then I lifted up mine eyes, and 
saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a 
ram which had two horns, and the two horns were 
high, but one was higher than the other, and the 
higher came up last. " The word ahad is certainly 
used here to describe a ram of a peculiar charac- 
ter; that is, one having two horns of unequal 
height, and so a certain, a peculiar, a unique ram. 
So in Ezekiel vii.5, it is used of an evil, an only 
evil ; that is, an evil of an unwonted character, an 
evil of a peculiar nature. In Solomon's Song 
vi.9, we have the words: " My dove, my undefiled 
is but one, she is the only one of her mother." It 
is quite certain that in this passage also the word 
"one" expresses the idea of something peculiar, 
something especially distinguished, something 
quite out of the ordinary character of things and 
persons of the same general class. It would be 
easy to give still other references illustrative of 



WAS THE WORLD MADE IN SIX DAYS? 31 

the same meaning of the word. Now, apply this 
Scripture use of the word one to the case in hand, 
and the meaning, will be, " And evening was, 
and morning was, a peculiar or unique day. " Thus 
we see that the evening and the morning here 
mentioned were, according to this explanation, a 
certain, a peculiar, a unique, and not an ordinary 
day. This so-called day, as we shall later more 
fully see, constituted an epoch, an era, a period of 
time of indefinite duration. 

Scientific and Other Considerations. 

We shall soon take up the Scripture use of the 
word day ; but there are a few antecedent con- 
siderations which ought to receive our passing at- 
tention. Geology has long declared that the earth 
required vast epochs to bring it into its present 
condition ; but it is not proposed to burden this 
article with geological technicalities, or any oth- 
er form of wearisome scientific terminology. It 
may, however, be safely affirmed that science 
probably shows that the order of creative de- 
velopment was that of the Mosaic record, first 
plants, then fish and fowl, and finally animals 
and man. If we were to go carefully into the 
testimony of rocks and were to consider that testi- 
mony as admissible, it would certainly be strongly 
in favor of an era of indefinite duration rather 
than a day of twenty-four hours, an era perhaps 
of thousands, possibly of millions, of years. In- 
deed, without any special scientific knowledge it 



32 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

can readily be scon that the works of the different 
days o\ Creation could not be put into the compass 
of days of twenty-four hours each, except by con- 
tinuous miracles of the most stupendous character. 
That God could do this, no one who rightly be- 
lieves in His omniscience and omnipotence can for 
a moment doubt; but that God did this is open to 
doubt so strong as to be virtually a denial. Such 
enormous haste as the hypothesis of days of 
twenty-four hours would necessitate is not in har- 
mony with God's methods, as we see them in Cre- 
ation or providence. Take, for example, the work 
of the sixth day. On that day the animals were 
created ; Adam was made ; the animals were col- 
lected together and named as they passed in re- 
view before Adam; on that day he was cast into 
a deep sleep by God, and a rib was taken from 
his side, was fashioned into a woman, and she 
was presented to Adam. If these were days of 
twenty-four hours each, then all that is recorded 
in the first five verses of the first chapter of Gene- 
sis took place in twenty-four hours. Who can be- 
lieve it? No one doubts that God cou/dhave done 
this, but it is difficult to believe that God did 
all this in that time. If these were days of 
twenty-four hours each, then the world could' not 
have been more than one hundred and forty-four 
hours older than man; and if he were created in 
the early part of the sixth day, the world was not 
even that much older than man. Is this conceiv- 
able? It is so only, as already remarked, by sup- 



WAS THE WORLD MADE IN SIX DAYS? S3 

posing continuous miracles of the most stupendous 
character ; but in the economy of God, so far as 
we can learn His ways, He has always kept the 
miraculous displays of His power within econom- 
ical limits. The length of the seventh day de- 
termines the length of the other six; but most 
commentators consider that God's Sabbatic day 
extends from Creation to the present hour. Must 
not then the other six days be days of indefinite 
duration? If the six days mentioned in Exodus 
xx. 1 1 are days of twenty-four hours each, so must 
the seventh day be one of twenty-four hours ; but 
God is represented as having rested on that day 
from His creative labors. If that day is still con- 
tinued, and so is one of indefinite duration, are 
we not justified in affirming that the other six 
were also periods of undefined length? 

Attention has often been called to the fact that 
many heathen cosmogonies give indirect confir- 
mation to the view here presented. Egyptian, 
Persian, Indian, and Etruscan legends are named 
by different writers on this subject, and while not 
of authority in themselves, they may be quoted 
as showing that this idea was widely diffused. 
Many Christians can remember how a generation 
ago their simple Christian faith was rudely 
shocked by scientific affirmations that the world 
was not made in six days of twenty-four hours 
each. The writer well remembers that in his 
boyhood his faith was greatly disturbed, and for a 
time almost wrecked, by statements of men older 
3 



34 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

and wiser than himself, men who read widely in 
the scientific literature of the times, and who 
affirmed that the statements of the Bible were 
disproved by the absolutely conclusive demonstra- 
tions of science. He was not able to refute these 
statements ; he thought the Bible taught that the 
world was made in six days, of twenty-four hours 
each. He thought he must hold on to the twen- 
ty-four-hour theory or reject the Bible. Thank 
God ! we now see that neither science nor Scripture 
teaches that the world was made in six days of 
twenty-four hours each ! To believe the Bible is 
one thing, but to believe all the interpretations 
which some men choose to give the Bible is quite 
another thing. 

Scripture Use of the Word "Day." 

Xow, let us look at the Scripture use of the 
word "day." Perhaps the highest Hebrew au- 
thority favors the etymology which refers the 
word to a root meaning " to be warm, to be hot, 
to glow with heat," as already suggested. If this 
origin of the word be correct, it might refer to the 
glowing or heated periods through which the world 
passed in its successive developments. But the 
purpose at this point is simply to refer to the 
Scriptural use of the word ; thus Scripture will in- 
terpret Scripture. Nothing is more certain than 
that the word yom, day, is repeatedly used in the 
Scripture when reference is made to epochs, eons, 



WAS THE WORLD MADE IN SIX DAYS? 35 

periods of indefinite length. We have the first in- 
stance in this immediate connection in the record 
of Creation itself; the word is found in Genesis 
ii.4. There we read: " These are the generations 
of the heavens and of the earth, when they were 
created, in the day {beyotri) that the Lord God made 
the earth and the heavens. " Here the word " day" 
is clearly not a solar day ; it is most certainly used 
to cover the entire period of Creation. This is the 
first time the word occurs after the history of the 
day of the creative week, and it will be admitted 
by all that it is here applied to the entire period. 
It would seem as if there were a providential pur- 
pose to show us at this point that the word " day" 
in the account of Creation meant an epoch, and 
not a period of twenty-four hours. It is strange 
that many of the readers of the Bible seem to 
have overlooked this verse, when they have in- 
sisted that the six days of Creation were days of 
twenty-four hours each. It is astonishing that 
traditional interpretations often close the eyes of 
even scholarly commentators to the plain reading 
of God's Word. The Hebrew Scriptures gener- 
ally clearly show that the word "day" often de- 
notes a period of past or future time without 
limit. In Isaiah xxx. 8, we read, " Xow go . . . 
and note it in a book, that it may be for the time 
to come for ever and ever." The phrase " time to 
come," as seen in the margin of our Bibles, liter- 
ally means, u the latter day." Nothing could be 
clearer than that the word " day" here refers to an 



J 



6 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 



indefinite period. In Job xviii. 20 we read, 
"They that come after him shall be astonied at 
his day" Here the word " day" stands for the 
whole period of a man's life. In Isaiah ii. 11 we 
have "... the Lord alone shall be exalted in 
that day," and in the next verse we have a refer- 
ence to "the day of the Lord of hosts." The 
word day here clearly means the time when God 
would punish His people for their sins; it prob- 
ably refers to the captivity in Babylon. This is a 
time when Jehovah will inflict vengeance on the 
people; a time is coming w r hen God's righteous 
anger would be revealed. In Jeremiah xlvi. 10 we 
have the words, " the day of the Lord God of hosts, 
a day of vengeance." In Ezekiel xxx. 3 we read: 
" For the day is near, even the day of the Lord is 
near, a cloudy day, it shall be the time of the 
heathen." In Zephaniah i. 7 we read, "For the 
day of the Lord is at hand." In Joel ii. 31 we 
have the words: "The sun shall be turned into 
darkness, and the moon into blood, before the 
great and the terrible day of the^Lord come." In 
all these passages a period of trial on the part of 
the people, and of righteous judgment on the part 
of God is announced. In Judges xviii. 1 the word 
days is used for a period of time in history, and in 
Bcclesiastes xii. 3 we have the expression, "In 
the day when the keepers of the house shall trem- 
ble," where the word day is used for old age. We 
use the word often with that meaning now. We 
still speak of "his day," "my day," "your day," 



WAS THE WORLD MADE IN SIX DAYS? 37 

9 

referring" to periods of time and to sections of 
one's age. 

There is one very striking passage to which at- 
tention should be called. In Zechariah xiv. 6, 7 
reference is made probably to the time of our 
Lord's coming, and to the entire Gospel dispensa- 
tion. ; the words are : " And it shall come to pass in 
that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor 
dark, but it shall be one day which shall be 
known to the Lord, not day nor night." The day 
to which reference is here made is certainly a day 
unique in the world's history. It is one of God's 
days, not one of man's days. It is such a day as 
distinguishes it from all of man's civil or solar 
days. It is a special time, a unique period, known 
as the day of the Lord. Reference might be 
made also to Psalm xc. 4 ; xcv. 8 ; Isaiah xlix. 8 ; 
2 Corinthians vi. 2; John ix. 4; 1 Thessalonians 
v. 2 ; 2 Peter iii. 10 ; Hebrews xiii. 8 ; and in 2 Peter 
iii. 8 we have the words : " But, beloved, be not 
ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the 
Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as 
one day." Unfortunately, many of the Lord's 
children have seemed to be ignorant of this very 
one thing. 

Prof. Tayler Lewis is authority for the general 
statement that Scripture clearly shows that there 
are days or eras which God supernaturally divided 
by His own power in the creation of the world, 
and that there are other days concerning which 
God said, " Let the sun divide them." These lat- 



38 OLD TESTAMENT DLFFICULTIES. 

ter are the natural, the solar days, measured off 
by the returning course of nature. Thus we have 
in the Bible two kinds of days; the one kind is 
directly God-made, the other is indirectly sun- 
made. Nothing is more certain than that the 
Bible does not teach that the days of Creation 
were days of twenty-four hours. We ought not 
to let any affirmation to that effect disturb our 
faith. We ought to be calm, truthful, and joyous 
in the Lord and in the word of His truth. Some 
of the scaffolds which men have erected around 
the temple of revelation are falling. Let them 
fall! Their disappearance will permit the divine 
temple to be the more clearly seen in its perfect 
symmetry, spotless beauty, and divine majesty. 
Away with false interpretations, away with all 
forms of superstition, away with all kinds of infi- 
delity! With glorious old Isaiah, writing under 
the inspiration of the Almighty, we shall say, 
" The grass withereth, the flower fadeth, but the 
word of our God shall stand forever." 



III. 

WHERE AND WHAT WAS THE GARDEN 
OF EDEN? 



III. 

WHERE AND WHAT WAS THE GARDEN 
OF EDEN? 

The Scriptural account of the Garden of Eden 
is found in the second chapter of Genesis, begin- 
ning with the eighth verse and going to the end 
of the seventeenth. The question as to the loca- 
tion and character of the Garden of Eden has 
always been one of fascinating interest. The 
writer of the Book of Genesis, in harmony with 
the well-known character of Hebrew composition, 
having carried his subject to a convenient resting- 
place, often reverts to a point already passed over. 
So, in giving an account of the Garden of Eden, 
he goes back to a time antecedent to man's ap- 
pearance on the earth. It is evident, from this 
account, that the garden was fully prepared some 
time — how r long, of course, we do not know — be- 
fore the intended occupant was prepared to pos- 
sess it. A wonderful name is Eden ! It is music 
on the tongue as it is pronounced, and its sound 
thrills the heart. It awakens the most delicious 
memories, and it suggests the most glorious proph- 
ecies. The word translated garden properly 
means an enclosure, from a word meaning to 
fence or to protect. In the Septuagint it is usu- 



4^ OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

ally rendered Paradise, but this is a word neither 
of Greek nor Hebrew origin. It is found in 
Xenophon's " Cyropaedia" and other of his writ- 
ings, about B.C. 400. The Greek translation of 
the Bible took this word as the translation of the 
garden which the Creator prepared for innocent 
man. The word has been generally supposed to 
be Persian, from which language Xenophon de- 
rived it. In that language it represents a park, 
a pleasure garden, a woodland enclosure, pro- 
tected by a wall, abundantly watered, and abound- 
ing with fruit-trees, flowers, and other objects of 
beauty. The word finally came to be applied to 
any delightful region, and was in this sense intro- 
duced into the later Hebrew in the form of par- 
decs. In our version it is sometimes rendered 
forest and sometimes orchard and garden. Prob- 
ably the derivation should be carried farther back 
than the Persian. 

The word is certainly found in the Armenian 
tongue, one of the oldest languages of one of the 
oldest people in the world. In this language it is 
compounded of two words, meaning edible grains 
or herbs. The Armenians frequently use the 
word as applied to a garden adjoining a dwelling; 
but it is almost certain that the origin of the word 
goes back to the Sanscrit, paradccslia, standing for 
fion of surpassing beauty. The word became 
finally a metaphor to express the idea of exquisite 
delight, and so it was used not only for the abode 
of our first parents in their innocence and bliss, 



WHERE AND WHAT WAS EDEN? 43 

but as a figurative name for Heaven, the home of 
the blessed. In this sense it is several times used 
in the New Testament. The word Eden is there- 
fore one of the most venerable and beloved names 
in geography. The Greek word hedone is nearly 
identical in sense as well as in sound. It ought to 
be constantly borne in mind that Eden was a tract 
of country, of which part, and as we may well be- 
lieve the most beautiful part, was the Paradise, 
park, organ, garden of all delight. We ought not 
to suppose that Eden is identical with the Garden 
of Eden. They are to be constantly distinguished 
if we are to have an intelligent conception of the 
Biblical narrative. 

The Allegorical Interpretation. 

In almost all ages of the church there have been 
writers who interpreted the Biblical narrative of 
Eden as a mere allegory. The same remark will 
apply to their interpretation of the whole story of 
the Creation and Fall of Man. Many of these 
allegorical interpretations are beautiful in them- 
selves, and are suggestive of important truths, 
although they are not adequate interpretations of 
the Biblical story. In harmony with this method 
of exposition, Philo made Paradise the governing 
faculties of the soul. The four rivers described 
in the Book of Genesis he made four virtues: 
Prudence, temperance, courage, and justice. 
Origen, under the general influence of this 
method, makes Paradise, Heaven; the trees, an- 



44 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

gels; and the rivers, wisdom. Other mystical in- 
terpreters have given different significations to 

the various features of the Biblical narrative, but 
have still retained the chief features of this alle- 
gorical method. A few more heroic interpreters 
have cut the Gordian knot by declaring that the 
entire story is the spurious interpolation of a com- 
paratively late age. Luther believed that the 
garden remained under the guardianship of an- 
gels until the time of the flood, and that so great 
was the convulsion of nature incident to the flood 
that all traces of Eden were obliterated. But the 
narrative in Genesis seems clearly to imply that 
at the time of the historian the countries and riv- 
ers described were still in existence. That im- 
pression grows constantly upon the mind of the 
careful reader of the Biblical story ; he strongly 
feels that the description of the garden is vividly 
present to the mind of the writer, and that the 
garden was capable of being visited by him and 
his readers. 

Traditional Edens. 

Almost all nations have had the idea of a ter- 
restrial Paradise. The conception of Eden, as in 
some sense the Garden of God, retains its hold not 
only on the minds of Hebrew prophets and poets, 
but in the hearts of poets, historians, and philoso- 
phers among all the nations with whose records we 
have become familiar. Arabian legends tell us 
of a garden on the summit of a great and glorious 



WHERE AND WHAT WAS EDEN? 45 

mountain inaccessible to men. Hindu traditions 
have their Garden of Eden on the top of a moun- 
tain shaped like the seed-cup of the sacred lotus. 
In this blessed abode of divinity is the holy grove 
of Indra; there also is the Jambu tree, whose 
fruit fed the waters of the Jambu River, waters 
which impart immortal life, beauty, and glory to 
all who drink thereof. The Chinese have their 
enchanted garden in one of the high ranges of the 
Houanlun Mountains. The Medo-Persians had 
theirs also. The Greeks had their Hesperides, 
suggestive of innocence, beauty, and immortality. 
All these traditions are but echoes of the Hebrew 
story. They bear eloquent testimony to the real- 
ity of the Biblical narrative. It is difficult, if not 
impossible, to account for the universality of this 
belief, except on the hypothesis of the historicity 
of the thing so widely believed. 

The Location of Eden. 

Where were the tract of Eden and the Garden 
of Paradise in Eden? Is it possible for us to an- 
swer these questions with any degree of certainty? 
In making this search, a starting-point is found in 
the second chapter of Genesis. This is an artless, 
child-like, and altogether charming description. 
In this respect it is in harmony with all the narra- 
tives of the primitive Hebrew Scriptures. Some 
would interpret the expression, " Eastward in 
Eden," in the eighth verse of the second chapter 
of Genesis, to mean eastward of the place of the 



4^> OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

writer. We may ask, Where was that writer's 
standing-point? Perhaps in Palestine. In all 
ages and lands the religion of the rising sun is 
poetically supposed to be of surpassing beauty. 
As a matter of fact, the cradle of the race did lie 
eastward to the land of Israel. But perhaps the 
phrase, " Eastward in Eden," means in the eastern 
part of the tract of Eden ; this seems to be the 
most natural interpretation of the phrase. We 
also have the description of the river which 
watered the garden, and its division into four dis- 
tinct streams, to guide us in our discussion. It is 
well known that few questions are so difficult of 
a satisfactory solution as the location of Eden. 
Its discussion has ever temptingly invited, and 
has often utterly baffled, the investigation of 
scholars. Europe, Asia, and Africa have been 
carefully examined to find this garden of beauty. 
It has been said that from " China to the Canary 
Isles, from the Mountains of the Moon to the 
coasts of the Baltic, no locality which in the 
slightest degree corresponded to the description 
of the first home of the human race has been left 
unexamined." Eden has been sought for all the 
way from Siberia to the South Sea Islands. Hasse 
gratified his national pride by placing it on the 
shore of the Baltic. Rudbeck, who was a Swede, 
ted Eden in Scandinavia. The Greeks placed 
the Garden of Hesperides in the extreme west, 
and others would have it, as we have seen, in 
some of the ranges of the glorious Himalayan 



WHERE AXD WHAT WAS EDEN? 47 

Mountains, near the region which traditionally, 
and perhaps correctly, is called the cradle of the 
race and the birthplace of mythical gods and his- 
torical men. Some have given tip the quest as 
utterly hopeless. They put the solution of this 
problem in the same category with that of per- 
petual motion, the quadrature of the circle, and 
the interpretation of unfulfilled prophecy. Two 
points, however, are absolutely clear in this 
whole discussion. We must find a river which is 
divided as one current, or, as a river system, into 
four streams, two of which are the Tigris and the 
Euphrates. The identification of these two rivers 
with the Hiddekel and the Phrat, has never been 
disputed. But what rivers shall stand for the Pison 
and the Gihon? It may be said that investigators 
here usually divide themselves into two great 
classes — those who place the Garden of Eden be- 
low the junction of the Tigris and the Euphrates, 
and those who seek it in the high tablelands of 
Armenia. All other interpretations may be 
readily eliminated from our problem. Those 
theories which make the Ganges, the Indus, or 
the Nile the rivers described in the narrative 
may at once be set aside. The men who sug- 
gested these theories, as a rule, deny the histori- 
cal reality of the Biblical description. They re- 
duce the inspired narrative to the level of a myth 
or saga. 

Let us again bear in mind that Eden was not a 
garden, but the region or territory in which the 



4 s 'Mi: XT DIFFICULTIES. 

garden Lay, and that there is no good reason to 
suppose that the deluge greatly changed the face 
of the country. As already suggested, the writer 
was evidently describing a territory which in his 
day was, in his judgment, capable of identifica- 
tion. Let us also remember that the Hebrew 
word Nahar stands not for an individual river, 
but for the river system of the country to which 
it is applied; and let us further bear in mind that 
the general situation is clearly fixed by the rivers 
Tigris and Euphrates. V/e are now prepared to 
affirm with these facts in mind that Eden was in 
the highlands of Armenia. To the illustration 
of this statement a few facts clearly contribute; 
let us look closely at these facts. A careful ex- 
amination of the highlands of Armenia, west of 
Mount Ararat, and about five thousand feet above 
the sea, will show that it corresponds, in a remark- 
able and fascinating degree, to the description of 
Eden given in the Book of Genesis. It is well 
known that, within a circuit of a few miles in diam- 
eter in this general region, four great rivers 
take their rise; and it is equally well known that 
four rivers have many branches. These 
rivers are the Euphrates, which is at least sixteen 
hundred miles long; the Tigris, which, there is 
good reason to believe, is the lliddekcl — a word 
which really signifies kl the rapid Tigris" — of Gen- 
and which is 1,146 miles long before its junc- 
tion with the Euphrates at Kurnah, where they 
form the vShat-el-Arab, which flows on about one 



WHERE AND WHAT WAS EDEN? 49 

hundred and twenty miles to the Persian Gulf. 
Midway between these two main sources of the 
Euphrates rises the Araxes, which flows northeast 
for a thousand miles and then pours its waters into 
the Caspian Sea. At no great distance from the 
Euphrates is the Halys, or Phasis, which runs a 
winding course northwesterly for seven hundred 
miles to the Black Sea. Two of these rivers are 
unquestionably among those named in Genesis, 
and the Phasis, or Halys, is supposed to be the 
Pison of Genesis, and the Araxes, the Gihon. A 
little study of comparative philology helps us at 
all these points, since both Gihon and Araxes 
mean practically the same thing; both names 
admirably describe the dart-like swiftness of 
the river. AH travellers who have carefully ex- 
amined this region testify that it is to this day 
one of wonderful fertility and of surpassing 
beauty. It is almost certain that in this region, 
occupying the highest portion toward the east, 
was the Eden of the Book of Genesis. 

Fruitful Lessons. 

The story of man's occupancy of the Garden of 
Eden, previous to his fall, is full of lessons of the 
greatest interest and importance. Attention has 
often been called to the fact that Eden was a 
place of work. Even in his spotless innocence 
Adam was commanded to dress the garden and to 
keep it. Work is God's benediction and not His 
malediction. Christ taught us that work was 
4 



5o OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

II is own normal condition as well as that of His 
Father, Horticulture was the first of all arts, 
and the first of all laborers was a sinless man. 
Indolence and barbarism are ever close neighbors. 
The man or the nation that refuses to obey God's 
law of subduing the earth must perish. A lazy 
man must greatly try the patience of the Infinite 
God. The Apostle Paul becomes righteously in- 
dignant at the Thessalonian idlers, declaring that 
if they will not work neither shall they eat. The 
cure of pauperism is found in the opportunity and 
the disposition for hard and remunerative work. 
Xo law of political economy is more universal and 
irresistible than this law. There is absolutely no 
hope for the American Indian except he be taught 
to work. Few men die of overwork. It has been 
well said that it is friction and not revolution that 
destroys machinery. Work is the inseparable con- 
dition of human happiness and progress. 

Eden w r as the birthplace of language. Dr. 
Boardman has charmingly illustrated this truth in 
his li Creative Week.'* vSpeech is the most won- 
derful faculty in man. It allies him to angels 
and to God. It proves his heirship to immortality 
and divinity. The origin of language is one of the 
most subtle and fascinating of problems. Perhaps 
speech came as a direct gift from Heaven. It is 
a wonderfully interesting thought that man's first 
• was the giving of names to God's 
creatures in Eden. The study of words is really 
the study that touches life and thought at their 



WHERE AND WHAT WAS EDEN? 51 

deepest points. It practically includes all other 
kinds of study. " Words are things," as the fiery 
Mirabeau said when addressing the stormy French 
Assembly. Our Lord has taught us that we are 
to be jadged by our words. The gift of language 
is both sublime and awful. The tongue may be 
almost angelic or it may be altogether Satanic. 
The tale-bearer or scandal-monger is the child of 
Hades. 

Every man has his Eden. There is a time of 
childlike innocence in every life. Innocence is 
not necessarily virtue. Virtue implies the test of 
temptation and the victory over temptation. In 
Eden man had his period of probation, involving 
both permission and probation. Adam must be 
taught the distinction between right and wrong. 
He must learn that he was a finite creature, 
and that God alone was infinite. The prohibi- 
tion thus given to Adam was necessary to 
teach him whether or not he was obedient. All 
human life is a prohibition ; there is a forbidden 
something in every man's life. Every man has 
his Eden ; every man is in some sense his own 
Adam. As often as any man chooses the evil 
rather than the good, the lower rather than the 
higher self, and Satan rather than God, he has re- 
peated Adam's fall. It is useless to chase Adam 
up and down the ages ; it is greatly wise to make 
sure that we stand when our test comes. Thank 
God! the second Adam stood, although the first 
Adam fell. Our true golden age is in the future. 



52 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

There is a diviner tree of life, more crystalline 
water, a sublimer and diviner Paradise than that 
of Eden. The rainbow of promise spans the 
firmament of Revelation, and the glory of Para- 
dise lost is ineffably transcended by the glory of 
Paradise regained. 



IV. 

WHAT WERE THE SIN AND SENTENCE IN 
EDEN? 



IV. 

WHAT WERE THE SIN AND SENTENCE 
IN EDEN? 

The account of the temptation, transgression, 
and sentence in Eden is found in the third chap- 
ter of Genesis. We are safe in saying that no 
words can overestimate the happiness of Adam 
and Eve during the period of their innocence. 
Made in the image of God, unassailed by temp- 
tation, pure in thought, word, and act, and holding 
communion with God as a man does with his dear- 
est friend, theirs was celestial joy amid terres 
trial environments. But a sad experience awaited 
them; their joy was to end in sorrow, their in 
nocence in transgression, and their Eden in Aven. 
Their history is forever after associated with that 
of a malignant spirit, and they are to become sin- 
ful, wretched, degraded, and despicable. 

We do not know how long was their period of 
joy and felicity ; many writers have given us vari- 
ous speculations on that point, but the Bible gives 
us no information. Somehow, in reading the 
story, one cannot help feeling that the period was 
short, although on that point no affirmation can 
be made. We now enter on the story of the in- 
troduction of sin and all its woes. This chapter 



5 6 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

gives us the tragic scene which brought Eden to 
an end. The story is the saddest which was ever 
told. The sin of our first parents changed Para- 
dise into pandemonium and Edenic bliss into 
Hadean woe. 

The Temptation. 

Our attention is directed in the study of this 
chapter to the instrument in the temptation of 
Adam and Eve; this instrument or agent is in- 
troduced to us as "the serpent." It should, how- 
ever, be borne in mind that the English word ser- 
pent comes to us from the Latin word scrpo, to 
creep, and when we turn to the Hebrew word, na- 
/ias/i, we see that it has no suggestion whatever of 
the motion of the serpent. The Hebrew word 
translated serpent is one of extreme difficulty. It 
would have been vastly better had it been simply 
accurately transliterated, rather than incur the 
liability of being incorrectly translated. Gese- 
nius, in his Hebrew and English lexicon, in- 
forms us that the word is unused in Kal, is 
onomatopoctic, and that it means to hiss, to whis- 
per, and is used especially of the whisperings of 
soothsayers. In Piel he makes it mean to prac- 
tise enchantment, to use sorcery, and also to 
augur, to forbode, to divine. He gives us a 
second root, probably signifying, as he says, to 
shine, and from that he gives us the word mean- 
ing brass. The question arises as to whether the 
latter word which he gives is really a second root. 



THE SIX AXD SEX TEX CE IN EDEX. 57 

Prof. Tayler Lewis, in his comments on the pas- 
sage in Dr. Lange's Commentary, quotes from 
Gesenius, and then adds : " It (this word) is far 
more likely, however, to have had for its primary 
sense that from which comes the secondary mean- 
ing of brass, or rather of bronze — shilling metal. 
This gives, as the primary, the idea of splendor, 
glistening. The name may have been given to 
the serpent from its glossy, shining appearance, 
or more likely from the bright glistening of the 
eye. This would bring it into analogy with the 
Greek drakon, from derko, derkotnai — sharp, pierc- 
ing sight. There is the same derivation from 
the eye in the Greek opliis, or from the general 
shining appearance, as a striking and beauti- 
ful, though terrible object. . . . The Latin ser- 
pens is simply a generic name — reptile." If the 
word has really for its primary sense the sec- 
ondary meaning of brass or of bronze, then 
it is used in Scripture in a variety of mean- 
ings. 

In certain of its uses and connections it will 
mean to examine fully, to discover by trial, or to 
practise divination. The name, therefore, ap- 
plies more appropriately to an intelligent being 
than to a reptile. Following the Septuagint, 
most modern translators have rendered the origi- 
nal word by serpent ; but even a casual study of 
the Scripture use of the word, especially if Pro- 
fessor Lewis is correct in his suggestion regarding 
its primary and secondary senses, shows us that 



58 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

it has many significations. It is translated divi- 
nations and enchantments; it is also rendered 
brass, brazen, chains, fetters, and in several 

plaees it is translated steel, 2 Samuel xxii. 35, 
Job xx. 24, Psalm xviii. 34. It is also rendered in 
Ezekiel, xvi. 36, filthiness. In Job xxvi. 13 we 
have the Hebrew words nahash bariacli, rendered 
" crooked serpent"; but many commentators af- 
firm that the reference is to some form of sea ani- 
mal, perhaps the sea-horse. The fact is that the 
word — if its primary sense was, as Professor 
Lewis suggests, that from which comes the sec- 
ondary meaning of brass or bronze — is so broad 
and varied in its meaning that it is not possible 
always to be sure of its right translation. The 
Septuagint translation, as already suggested, ren- 
ders the Hebrew word nahash by the Greek word 
opkiS) a serpent. But there is no certainty that 
this translation was chosen because it was its fixed 
meaning, but rather because it was difficult to de- 
termine its fixed meaning, and this word, on the 
whole, seemed to the translators the most appro- 
priate. Indeed, they do not seem to have care- 
fully studied the original; and we have seen that 
they have not rendered the word uniformly, but 
variously. The New-Testament writers almost 
always quoted from the Septuagint version, and 
they seldom changed a word in their ([notations. 
". therefore, carried over this word ophis into 
their writings; and thus we come, as already inti- 
mated, to have the English word serpent as the 



THE SIN AND SENTENCE IN EDEN. 59 

translation of the Hebrew word nahash, coming 
through the Greek word aphis. 

A diligent study of the narrative in Genesis 
shows that the nahash stood at the head of all in- 
ferior animals. He walked erect; he was endued 
with the power of speech ; he could reason, allure, 
and persuade. Adam had named the animals, 
perhaps, according to their distinguishing charac- 
teristics ; but the power of speech on the part of 
the nahash does not seem to have surprised Eve 
at the time of her temptation nor Adam later. 
They seem to have been familiar with the posses- 
sion of this power on the part of the nahash. It 
has sometimes been said that certain species of 
serpents have rudimentary feet ; but no one will 
affirm that any serpent ever had the gifts of 
speech possessed by the nahash. Serpents have 
no organs of speech. God could, of course, have 
given this power to a serpent in Eden; but there 
is no hint that any special bestowment was made 
in this case, as in the case of Balaam's ass, whether 
that narrative be subjective or objective. 

The question arises as to what this agent was, 
and who was the principal behind the agent. Is 
this narrative history or allegory? It is easier to 
admit the historicity of the narrative than to ex- 
plain it on any other hypothesis; but even if we 
admit that it was allegory, its profound truths 
and lessons would still remain. The presence of 
some skilful principal back of the active agent is 
apparent at every stage. That principal was Sa- 



Co 01 D TESTA ME XT DIFFICULTIES. 

tan, as many passages of Scripture clearly teach. 
But what was this creature, here called the na- 
liasli t Did a slimy, loathsome snake tempt our 
first mother? It is almost impossible so to be- 
lieve; and the Scriptures do not so affirm. No 
mere reptile — except by the presence of continued 
miracle — could do the things attributed to this 
nahash. It is far more natural to believe that we 
have here some apostate spirit, erect in attitude, 
attractive in form, resplendent in appearance, 
and eloquent in speech. The sentence later pro- 
nounced on this creature clearly shows that with 
the sentence came humiliation, manifested in a 
degrading form of motion and method of secur- 
ing food. If a serpent had tempted Eve ; there 
would be no significance in the sentence inflicted. 
Our Lord clearly teaches us in John viii. 44 that 
the devil was a murderer and the father of lies 
from the beginning; and the Apostle Paul, in 
writing to the Corinthians, compared the seduc- 
tion of Eve to that of the Corinthians; but the 
Corinthians were in no danger of being deceived 

brute animal, hence Eve must have been be- 
guiled by something more than a reptile. We are 
distinctly told that Satan can be transformed into 
an angel of light; and there seems to have been 
no other time when such a transformation was so- 
important to his Satanic purposes as in the Gar- 
den of Eden. One can scarcely help feeling that 

r as s<> transformed there. He may have as- 
sumed the form of some glorious and winged 



THE SIN AND SENTENCE IN EDEN, 61 

creature, such as in Scripture was known as a 
seraph ; some creature with angelic attractions in 
dress, appearance, and eloquence. It is certain 
that the sentence pronounced changed the shape 
and properties of this creature ; it was then that 
it was commanded to go on its belly and eat 
dust. Before' this curse was pronounced this be- 
ing may have been one of the most intelligent, 
gentle, and beautiful of creatures. His mode of 
attack was wonderfully skilful. He took advan- 
tage of Eve when she was alone, and thus with- 
out the counsel and succor of her husband. He 
does not contradict the word of God ; he merely 
asks questions. He insinuates doubt ; he implies 
that it • cannot be possible that God would lay 
upon Eve an arbitrary command. At the outset 
the woman answers well ; but it would have been 
better if she had not parleyed with the arch- 
traitor. Satan denies nothing, affirms nothing; 
but he questions everything. Finally he becomes 
bold and blasphemous. He suggests that God is 
jealous of His honors and fears to have His crea- 
tures become wise as gods. His language is so 
artful that while he mQans one thing, Eve under- 
stands him to mean another. We never can ex- 
plain how the first thought of sin can arise in the 
minds of innocent beings. This is the first time 
that a lie was even suggested to Eve. The origin 
of evil is a metaphysical problem which the Bible 
does not attempt to explain. It is the bottomless 
abyss of rationalistic thinking and of theological 



62 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

teaching. It baffles speculative philosophy as 
truly as Scriptural theology. To explain sin from 
our point of view is to excuse sin. The Bible 
clearly shows that God is not the author of sin, 
and that it was man's volition which brought his 
pristine innocence to an end. The finest meta- 
physical analysis of the progress of sin is given us 
by the Apostle James i. 13-15; here we have the 
natural history of sin, and no human reasoning 
has ever approached the skill of this analysis. 

The Transgression. 

Eve's curiosity was excited. She had listened 
with interest ; she had gazed with longing. De- 
sire brought forth sin, and sin when -finished 
brought forth death. The sophistry of the na- 
Jiasli was too much for her unsophisticated na- 
ture. He seemed so wise, so noble, so good; and 
the promised result was so entrancing! The frail 
mother of the race in that evil hour disobeyed 
God, partook of the fruit, and gave it to her hus- 
band ; with fatal facility her husband ate, and, as 
Milton says, " brought death into the world, and 
all our woes." 

We know not what the fruit was of which they 
partook. Many Greek traditions make it the fig; 
of the rabbis suggest that it was the vine or 
the olive; but the Latin fathers and Milton sug- 
gest that it was the apple. He sings of it as " that 
crude apple which perverted Eve." We probably 
have in this later supposition an unconscious testi- 



THE SIN AND SENTENCE IN EDEN. 63 

mony to the value of the apple as, all things con- 
sidered, the best fruit the world has produced. 
Were Adam and Eve forced to eat? Certainly 
not. It was their own voluntary act. Satan 
could tempt them to sin, but he could not sin for 
them. He can incite men to sin, but he cannot 
compel men to sin. They lifted the floodgate ad- 
mitting the stream of evil to flow into the world, 
and they did it of their own deliberate choice. 
God is not the author of sin. But why did God 
permit such a result? Could God have prevented 
it? Yes, by making man a machine. If man be 
man, he must be free ; if not free, he is not man. 
Freedom is the inalienable attribute of manhood ; 
but if free, he may use his freedom for evil rather 
than for good. That is the solemn, awful, and yet 
glorious responsibility of manhood. God could 
not — it is said reverently — have prevented man's 
sin without doing violence to the nature of man 
as a free agent, of man as man. God gave him 
every persuasive to obedience, and every dissua- 
sive from disobedience. Milton, to quote him 
once more, expresses a true thought regarding 
man in his actual strength and inherent freedom, 
" Sufficient to have stood, but free to fall. ,, Had 
God by physical force interposed to prevent this 
act of disobedience, there would have been no 
virtue in obedience. Involuntary obedience is 
no obedience. If there be not freedom, there is 
neither virtue nor vice. The introduction of sin 
is the problem of the ages. We can, however, 



64 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

see seme signal benefits arising from these sad 
catastrophes. If the first Adam had not sinned, 
the second Adam had not redeemed; where sin 
abounded, grace superabounded. The loss of 
the terrestrial Paradise made possible a celestial 
Paradise. The fall gives incomparable glory to 
the manifestation of God's wisdom, mercy, and 
love. Redeemed sinners will sing songs in 
Heaven, to which unf alien angels will ever be 
strangers. Eternity will be the witness of God's 
refulgent glory, ineffable love, and immaculate 
holiness in the salvation of lost man ! 

The Sentence Inflicted. 

The eyes of Adam and Eve were opened. The 
commission of sin always lets in a terrible light 
upon the soul. Our judgment of sin changes the 
moment we have committed sin. Innocence had 
previously clothed Adam and Eve as with a robe; 
now leafy vestments perform that office. Con- 
scious guilt made them cowards, and they es- 
caped into the dark recesses of the garden, as if 
they could hide from the all-seeing God. God in 
the cool of the day sought them out. He was 
already the good Shepherd, going after the wan- 
dering sheep. In the ethnic religions we see man 
toilfully seeking after God; in revealed religion 
we see God lovingly seeking man. Sin existed 
in the universe before it blighted the blessedness 
len, and love was eternal in the heart of God 
before Adam and Eve were placed in Eden. 



THE SIN AND SENTENCE IN EDEN. 65 

Adam's lack of chivalry, born of sin, blames the 
woman, and the woman blames the serpent, and 
the inference is that the nahash would blame 
God; but Adam's reply was too witless to deserve 
God's notice. God does not interrogate the na- 
hash. Out of pure malignity he was self-moved 
in harmony with his inherent Satanism ; on him, 
therefore, first falls the terrible words of doom. 
Doubtless the curse fell both upon the principal 
and the agent. It is now that the nahash be- 
comes degraded to its present loathsome appear- 
ance, though formerly it may have been beautiful 
and may have moved with wings, with head erect 
and with beauty and dignity in its form. Doubt- 
less, also, the curse was a typical prophecy of the 
great victory which Christ was to win over Satan 
and all his works. Enmity was now put between 
the seed of the nahash and of the woman. From 
this time forth two kinds of people are seen strug- 
gling in the world. Evermore there will be a 
Cain and an Abel, an Ishmael and an Isaac, an 
Esau and a Jacob; the one will be after the flesh 
and the other after the spirit. This enmity un- 
derlies the mighty conflict of the ages. Under 
Christ go forth the hosts of truth and righteous- 
ness; under Satan the forces of death and hell. 
The battle will be waged until Christ becomes 
King of all nations, and is recognized as Lord 
blessed for evermore. 

Motherhood was henceforth to bring sorrow. 
Motherhood is the glory of womanhood. In 
5 



66 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

motherhood woman loses herself in another life. 
In giving another life to the world motherhood 
becomes like Godhood. If motherhood multiplies 
a woman's sorrows, it multiplies also her power to 
bestow blessings. Christianity everywhere puts 
the crown of glory upon the brow of woman and 
mother. In bestowing a new life the rapture of life 
is wondrously and almost divinely experienced. 

The very ground was cursed for man's sake, 
and in more sweat and toil than otherwise would 
have been necessary was man to eat his bread. 
Eve's name is now changed from Isha^ manness, 
to CliavaJi, life or living — as the mother of all liv- 
ing. From the skins of animals, probably slain 
for sacrifices, they made clothing for themselves. 
They are now sent from the garden; and God, 
probably in holy sarcasm, rebukes Adam's at- 
tempt to become like God. He listened to the 
voice of the tempter, and instead of becoming 
like God, he has become an outcast. Behold the 
cherubim and the flaming sword at the gate of 
Eden ! All connected with the cherubim is very 
obscure. This seems to be the first occasion of 
the introduction of this mystic symbol, which 
later was to represent some of the profoundest 
mysteries of redemption. In this symbol was a 
glorious element of hope. Promises of Paradise 
restored marked the sorrowful departure of our 
first parents from Paradise lost. The gleaming 
sword from the midst of the cherubim pointed to 
the cross of Calvary. 



THE SIN AND SENTENCE IN EDEN. 67 

Ethnic Traditions. 

Many nations have legends of the fall. The 
Chaldean mythologists make a thirst of knowl- 
edge the cause of man's fall. In the Persian leg- 
ends we have a happy pair, Meschiah and Mes- 
cliiane, who were holy in deed and word, and who 
dwelt in a garden. In the Hindu mythology there 
is a king of dragons named Naga ; probably this 
is a form of the Hebrew naliash. The first being 
created by Brahma, Krishna, triumphs over Kaii- 
naga by trampling on his head. Doubtless all 
the nations absorbed something of the truth fully 
revealed in the Bible. The Bible story teaches 
the utter malignity of Satan. Every man has his 
own Eden. Every man is in some sense his own 
Adam. Every man must watch and pray that he 
be not led into temptation. God's mercy runs as 
a golden thread through the whole story of reve- 
lation. Preparation of the incarnation of Christ 
is seen at Eden's gate. It is the splendor of 
prophecy, the charm of history, and the glory of 
psalmody ; and it reaches through the Bible and 
through the history of the race from Eden lost to 
Eden found. 



WHAT WAS CAIN'S MARK, AND WHO WAS 
HIS WIFE ? 



V. 

WHAT WAS CAIN'S MARK, AND WHO 
WAS HIS WIFE? 

The fullest account of Cain's life is found in the 
fotirth chapter of Genesis. There was doubtless 
much significance in the name by which Eve 
called her first-born son. What is the meaning of 
his name? To this question many answers have 
been given. Some writers connect it with the 
Arabic kayn, meaning a smith, or kayin, a lance, 
because of the arts which the Cainites introduced. 
Others derive it from a word meaning envy ; others 
from a word signifying to beat, with a possible 
allusion to the murder of Abel. Still others from 
a word meaning to lament. But the best author- 
ities derive it from the word kanah, to create, to 
acquire, to obtain, making the name mean " posses- 
sion," or "acquisition." This seems to be the 
meaning of Eve's words when she said: " I have 
gotten a man from the Lord. " He was, according 
to the record, the first-born of the human race, and 
also the first murderer and fratricide. What did 
Eve mean by her statement regarding his birth? 
Did she imagine that the son now born was no 
other than the divine personage promised in the 
gracious assurance recorded in the fifteenth verse 



72 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

of the preceding chapter? Did she really say, "I 
have gotten a man (even) Jehovah"? No one will 
donbt that her words can fairly be so interpreted. 
She may have really believed that the seed prom- 
ised which should bruise the serpent's head had 
now come. Others make her words to mean, " I 
have gotten a man with the help of Jehovah." 
Those who so interpret her words are not governed 
so much by the language of the text as by the opin- 
ion that she could not so soon have developed the 
Messianic idea, that this belief would credit her 
with too mature a christological conception. But 
we know that Enoch, in the seventh generation, 
recognized Jehovah as the coming one ; and Eve 
might have done so thus early. It is certain that 
the mind of Eve was much occupied with the idea 
of the coming deliverer. It was natural for a 
young mother, especially in the wonderful cir- 
cumstances of this birth, to cherish high hopes of 
her first-born son. In any case, her words indi- 
cate a beautiful faith. In the birth of Cain, her 
faith laid hold of the word " Jehovah," as seen in 
the fact that she used the divine name Jehovah, 
and not the vaguer Elohim, the name she used 
when holding the colloquy with the wicked na- 
hash. Some have supposed that previous to this 
she had borne daughters, and that the birth of a 
son was thus emphasized; but the natural impres- 
sion in reading the narrative is that Cain was the 
first-born of the human race. What delight must 
have been experienced when this child was born! 



CAIN'S MARK, AND HIS WIFE. 73 

Every mother can recall the marvels of this won- 
drous experience. But imagine the feelings of 
the first mother — at least so far as this record in- 
forms us — at the birth of the first-born man child. 
No imagination, however vivid, can fully conceive 
the reality of this impressive case. Well might 
Eve think that this child was no other than the 
promised deliverer. This child was at least, we 
are safe in saying, the pledge of the deliverer at 
some time, even if he were not himself that de- 
liverer. In this particular case the young mother 
was greatly mistaken in her estimate of Cain's 
worth. It would seem as if the tempter in the 
garden had more to do with him than Jehovah. 

Offerings by Cain and Abel. 

To Adam and Eve another son was born. Him 
they called, perhaps by divine direction in allu- 
sion to his untimely end, Abel, meaning vanity, 
a term which the psalmist applies to the race as a 
whole. Eve seems more sober now in naming 
this child than w T hen she named Cain. Life's ex- 
periences are more numerous and serious. The 
historian seven times, with a pathetic iteration, 
mentions the fact that Abel was Cain's brother. 
If the name were divinely given, then it was an 
unconscious and melancholy prophecy of Abel's 
early death. Abel was a keeper of sheep ; Cain 
was a tiller of the ground. The parents brought 
up their sons to habits of industry. The duty of 
religious worship had also been taught the two 



74 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

sons. There was already a speeial time and place 
tor worship. Already the Sabbath seems to have 

been observed, as indicated by the phrase, "in 

process of time," or more literally, "at the end of 
days." To the place where the visible glory of 
God was displayed, or the Shekinah, the sons 
brought their offerings. Cain brought of the 
fruit of the ground, and Abel of the firstlings of 
his flock. Thus in the dawn of human life we see 
the offering of sacrifices to God. God must have 
given some instruction regarding these offerings. 
Here at the very threshold of history we come on 
the mystery of the institution of sacrifices. This 
fact suggests profound questions in life and its re- 
lations to God. For Abel and his offering God 
had respect ; but not unto Cain and his offering. 
There was a difference between the offerings, and 
also between the offerers. Cain's offering was an 
acknowledgment of God as a benefactor, he bring- 
ing a minchaJi, or thank-offering. But in his offer- 
ing there was no confession of sin, no pica for par- 
no suggestion of atonement. His offering 
such as any self-righteous man could make. 
Abel seems to have brought a thank-offering and 
a victim to be slain for his sins. Here is a 
suggestion of the sacrifice of Christ, who was a 
lamb slain from the foundation of the world. 

There was also a difference in the spirit of the 
offerers. In Hebrews xi.4 we read that "by faith 
Abel offered unto Cod a more excellent sacrifice 
than Cain." This is suggestive language. It 



CAIN'S MARK, AND HIS WIFE. 75 

teaches that Abel's offering had much more in it 
than Cain's; it was fuller— pleiona — than Cain's. 
Wickliffe's translation is, a "much more sacri- 
fice." It possessed a principle which Cain's 
lacked; for Abel already by faith grasped the 
hope of the coming Messiah. The brothers were 
here and thus divided. They were types of the 
two great classes found in all ages; one serves 
God only from the head, giving Him distant hom- 
age as Creator ; but the other draws near to God, 
acknowledging the offerer's personal sinfulness 
and God's divine and immaculate holiness. Al- 
ready we have a suggestion of the truth that 
without the shedding of blood there is no remis- 
sion of sin. 

Cain's Awful Crime. 

God's rejection of Cain's offering made him 
very wroth. He showed fierce anger against his 
brother. His state of mind was thoroughly Sa- 
tanic; but God was patient with him, notwith- 
standing his contumacy. God expostulated with 
him as to how he also might receive a blessing. 
For him also there might be a lifting up of the 
countenance of God. But if repentance was not 
exercised, sin, like a wild beast in ambush, would 
crouch at the door ready to spring upon the sinner. 
Sin did so crouch and so spring, and it finally made 
Cain its prey. It has been said that the first mur- 
der was caused by a religious dispute ; and it is cer- 
tain that many times since disputes about religion 



76 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

are responsible for acts of irreligioh. Cain con- 
cealed his true sentiments toward Abel and con- 
versed freely with him until he could carry out 
his murderous design. So acted Joab toward Ab- 
ner and Amasa ; so acted Absalom toward Amnon. 
Cain was naturally a morose and vengeful man; 
and so he rose up and slew his brother. We are 
fully informed as to why he committed this Sa- 
tanic deed (i John iii. 12), " because his own works 
were evil, and his brother's righteous." No 
crime in the world's history impresses the mind 
with horror more than the crime of Cain; and 
treachery adds blackness to the fratricide. Per- 
haps he did not fully know how small a matter 
might cause death, as, according to the record, 
this was the first instance of human mortality. 
But it is certain that the spirit of murder was in 
his heart. Solemn to us are the words of our 
Lord at this point, teaching us that the spirit of 
hate, ardently cherished, makes any man a mur- 
derer in God's sight. Thus by the act of Cain 
death came into the world, and the first man who 
became its victim died a martyr for truth and 
God. How the hearts of Adam and Eve must 
have bled! Their first-born son is a murderer, 
and their next born is the victim! We maybe 
sure that over the living sinner they grieved more 
than over the dead saint. Abel was the first from 
earth to enter Heaven, and lie entered it as the 
first of the noble army of martyrs. It was mar- 
vellous mercy on the part of Cod that lie should 



CAIN'S MARK, AND HIS WIFE, 77 

enter into a colloquy with Cain, who now added 
lying to murder. It would be difficult to use 
words which were more insolent, contemptuous, 
and mendacious than those of Cain who said to 
God, when He asked concerning Abel, " I know 
not; am I my brother's keeper?" His heart was 
already hardened toward his brother, as it was 
impious toward God. Terrible is God's curse 
upon Cain! Abel's voice was silent, but his blood 
was shed, and that blood with trumpet tongue 
shall cry from the ground until its voice shall 
reach the throne of the Almighty, calling down 
vengeance on the guilty. To Cain the very 
ground is cursed, so that it could not yield ade- 
quate results for the most careful tillage. A 
fugitive and a vagabond shall he be. Well 
might he exclaim, " My punishment is greater 
than I can bear." If we can take as accurate the 
other rendering, " My iniquity is greater than 
forgiveness," we may cherish the hope of his re- 
pentance. He is driven from the place where the 
visible symbols of God's presence were manifested, 
and no more shall he see the divine glory shining 
forth between the cherubim. From the society 
of his parents he is driven forth as a vagabond 
on the earth, which is cursed to a double barren- 
ness wherever he shall set his foot. Remorse 
shall gnaw his soul. Every stranger he fancies 
will seek to slay him. Thus the guilty wretch 
almost excites the pity of angels, and he has alto- 
gether won the fellowship of devils. 



7^ OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

His Mark. 

We do not know where the " land of Nod" was. 
The name means simply flight, or exile, or va- 
grancy. Some have fancifully supposed that they 
found a connection between the original word 
and India; others have seen a relation between 
the words Cain and China; but all that we know 
of its position is that it was "east of Eden." It 
is utterly vain to attempt the identification of 
Nod with any definite locality. There he built a 
city, or fort, or kremlin, and named it after his 
son Enoch, as his own name would dishonor the 
place, he built the fort, or keep, for self-protec- 
tion under the instinct of fear. Perhaps in his 
effort to build a city he disobeyed God ; and pos- 
sibly, also, in that effort we see how vigorously 
he strove to overcome the disadvantages under 
which he suffered as a tiller of the ground, which 
now, as a part of his curse, had become virtually 
barren under his hand As a vagrant, perhaps 
hating and hated, he lived, with awful memories 
of sin, and thus with terrible experiences of re- 
morse. 

Tin's leads us to ask, What was the mark which, 
in our common version, it is said that the Lord 
put upon Cain? This question has given rise to 
many foolish conjectures. Pour out of every five 
ns whom we meet believe that some brand, 
mark, or stigma was placed on the brow of Cain. 
Nothing is further from the truth. The Scrip- 



CAIN'S MARK, AND HIS WIFE. 79 

ture, properly translated, makes no suggestion of 
such a brand, and yet this thought has gone into 
literature, into speeches in our courts, and into 
much of our common phraseology. It is a thou- 
sand pities that the Bible is so often mistrans- 
lated, misinterpreted, and misapplied. He is do- 
ing a genuine service for God's Word and for the 
young people of our churches who clearly and 
wisely separates between God's revelation and 
man's misinterpretation. From the Septuagint 
version in which we have the words, " groaning 
and trembling shalt thou be," some have supposed 
that he became a pitiable paralytic. One old 
writer, author of " Bereshith Rabba," says the 
mark was a circle of the sun rising on him; 
another that it was Abel's dog which constantly 
followed him. Some interpreters of the Talmud 
say that it was the letter tan on his forehead, as the 
first letter of the Hebrew word tesJinbeh, meaning 
repentance; and one learned rabbi, to surpass 
all other ridiculous interpretations, affirmed that 
Cain's mark was a long horn growing out of his 
forehead. This is all pure tradition, superstition, 
and nonsense. The wetched fratricide was filled 
with alarm lest all he met should slay him, and 
God, as an act of special grace, declared that 
sevenfold vengeance should be taken on the 
slayer of Cain. To comfort the wretched outcast, 
as the Revised Version has it, " the Lord ap- 
pointed a sign for Cain." This is an excellent 
translation of the original phrase. He did not 



So OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

put a mark upon Cain; that would have been the 
most likely way to have brought upon him the 
dangers which he feared. The Lord simply gave 
him a sign, or token, as a memorial that he should 
not be slain. The word translated "mark" is otJi. 
In like manner God gave a sign, or token, to 
Noah, Genesis ix. 13; to Moses, Exodus iii. 12; 
offered one to Ahaz, Isaiah vii. 11, and to Heze- 
kiah, Isaiah xxxviii. 7, 8. Probably this sign was 
visible to Cain only, and was not in any way per- 
ceptible to others. Just what the sign was we 
may never be able to determine, but nothing is 
more certain than that it was not a brand upon 
himself. One is almost impatient that such mis- 
conceptions of Scripture should be found in the 
thought and literature of our time, as w r ell as 
through the past centuries. A mistranslation 
often perpetuates itself in the daily speech even 
of those who know the true meaning of the pas- 
sages which they continue to misrepresent. 

Cain's Wife. 

Who was Cain's wife? This question is one of 
the standing conundrums on the part of certain 
irreverent or religiously indifferent men and wo- 
men. It has also perplexed some of the most 
thoughtful and devout believers in divine revela- 
tion. It is astonishing that so many men are 
ready to neglect known duty in their desire to 
find objections to the inspired narrative. When 
urged to follow Christ they immediately ask un- 



CAIN'S MARK, AXD HIS WIFE. 8 1 

answerable questions regarding the Bible. It is 
well to remind such cavillers that it will be quite 
time enough for them to demand solutions of per- 
plexing problems when they have obeyed God in 
all known duties. So long as they are disobe- 
dient to what they thoroughly know, they have 
no right to expect light on problems which they 
may never be able exhaustively to understand. 
Some one has quaintily said that these critics are 
determined to choke themselves with bones, while 
they reject the supply of boneless fish which is suf- 
ficient for all their wants. 

Every earnest student of the Bible, however, 
may properly study and, if possible, discover all 
the truth which it contains. Doubtless, as John 
Robinson in circumstances of the greatest interest 
said in substance, God has more light yet to break 
forth from His word. We do well to study it 
carefully, and to master all the discoverable truth 
which it contains. Was Cain's wife his sister? 
So it has been frequently and emphatically af- 
firmed. 

If there were not various centres of Creation, 
and so a possible pre-Adamite race, there must 
have been a marriage between some brother and 
sister in the Adamite family. It is barely possible, 
however, that this incestuous marriage, as we now 
judge, was not between Cain and his sister. Adam 
must already have had daughters of whose birth 
we have no information. There was now a very 
considerable population. We know that at the 



8a OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

birth of Seth, Adam was one hundred and thirty 
years old, and in all probability there were many 
sons and daughters besides those specifically 
named. There certainly was a population whom 
Cain feared, lest he might be put to death. We 
can hardly suppose that he was afraid of his father 
and mother. It is not at all improbable that there 
was a very considerable population before Cain's 
marriage, and his w 7 ife may have been from one 
of these families. It is not impossible, however, 
that she was literally his sister. We may well 
believe that if she stood in this relationship she 
was married to Cain before the death of Abel, for 
we can hardly believe that after that event she 
would have been willing to become Cain's wife. 
The marriage of brothers and sisters may have 
been considered at that time a necessary condition 
to the propagation of the race. We may well be- 
lieve also that in that early day the contrasts 
between members of the primitive family, as 
between Cain and Abel, were strongly marked 
Thus the conditions of marriage would be more 
normal than between members of the same family 
in our day. We know also that the laws prohibit- 
ing the union of brothers and sisters, which after- 
ward were enacted, were then unknown. It is a 
remarkable fact also that in very much later times 
and among what were then the most civilized na- 
tions, such alliances were not forbidden, and were 
not considered incestuous. We know that not only 
did the Athenian law not forbid such marriages, 



CAIN'S MARK, AND HIS WIFE. %3 

but it made it compulsory for a brother to marry a 
sister, if after reaching a certain age she had not 
found a husband. We know also that Abraham 
married Sarah, who was his half-sister, and Moses 
was himself the offspring of a marriage which the 
laws he promulgated would have prohibited as un- 
holy. The question as to Cain's wife is not really 
one of much importance. The frequency and per- 
sistency with which it is asked is no evidence of 
its real importance, but rather of the inquisitive, 
if not perverse, spirit of the questioners. It is 
fitting, however, that all the light which the 
Scripture enables us to possess should be thrown 
upon the subject. When objectors to divine reve- 
lation ask this question, supposing that it is in 
some sense an excuse for their neglect of duty, 
they deserve very little consideration at our hands. 
When they will in the spirit of reverence obey all 
the commands which they fully know, it will be 
quite time enough for us to give them solutions of 
the perplexing problems of Scripture. Were God 
to give them full light on unknown duties, so long 
as they refuse to walk in the light they now have, 
God would then be putting a premium on their 
disobedience and perversity. Those who do 
God's will fully know that will. This is a law 
illustrated in the study of every science and art, 
as truly as in the experience and practice of true 
religion. Only as we walk in the light which we 
have, in the study of any physical phenomenon, 
can we expect to have additional light falling 



84 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

upon unseen paths. We must walk up to the 
limit of the known, before we can step over into 
the realm of the unknown, in all the broad spheres 
ientific thought, as truly as in the great realms 
of divine revelation. There is so much worth ful 
knowledge which we can acquire that it is use- 
less to spend time in the effort to acquire knowl- 
edge which never can be certain, and which if 
certain is practically worthless. It is well some- 
times frankly to say, " we do not know." Often 
the profoundest ignorance is the serenest knowl- 
edge. Time and energy are too valuable to be 
wasted in useless pursuits; and further inquiry 
concerning Cain's wife belongs to this class of 
useless efforts. 

His Fate. 

His character seems to have been morose and 
malicious to a remarkable degree. His de- 
scendants are enumerated to the sixth generation. 
They became numerous and powerful. Lamech 
instituted polygamy. Jabal adopted a nomadic 
life. Jubal invented musical instruments, and 
Tubal-Cain was the first of the great family of 
smiths. The civilization of this line was marked 
by violence and godlessness and by song and love. 
The names of the women bespeak their beauty 
and attractiveness. Theirs was an unsanctified 
civilization, while that of Seth was marked by 
great simplicity and godly sincerity. Cain may 
have obtained divine forgiveness. His penitence 



CAIN'S MARK, AND HIS WIFE. 85 

may have been long and sincere. If the transla- 
tion of Genesis iv. 13 may be, "mine iniquity is 
greater than that it may be forgiven," there is 
some hope of his sincere repentance and final sal- 
vation. We know that our Lord in dying prayed 
for His murderers, and we know that Stephen 
followed the example of his Lord in this regard, 
and possibly so did Abel. We know that we are 
all in danger of being murderers in heart, for 
hatred of our brother, according to Christ's 
higher law, is murder. 

Thank God ! that for us and for Cain there is 
power enough in the cleansing blood of Christ to 
give us the whiteness of snow! The words of 
God, in Isaiah i. 18, fall like a benediction upon 
our hearts, conscious of their many and heinous 
sins: "Come now, and let us reason together, 
saith the Lord; though your sins be as scarlet, 
they shall be white as snow ; though they be red 
like crimson, they shall be as wool. ,, 



VI. 

WHO WERE THE SONS OF GOD AND THE 
DAUGHTERS OF MEN? 



VI. 

WHO WERE THE SONS OP GOD AND . 
THE DAUGHTERS OF MEN? 

In Genesis, the sixth chapter and the first and 
second verses, our attention is called to these two 
classes, and to their relations with each other. It 
is quite certain that the patriarchal age was not 
one of general innocence. So soon as daughters 
were born, the beauty of womanhood tempted de- 
praved men, and the holiness of married love 
soon gave place to unhallowed desire. Thus the 
primeval sanctities of domestic life early degener- 
ated into sinful unions between those who were 
called "sons of God," and those who are de- 
scribed as daughters of men. 

Distinct Classes. 

Soon after the sin of Cain mankind was divided 
into two distinct classes ; the one class was repre- 
sented by Cain, who went out from the presence 
of God, and the other class was represented by 
Seth, who still abode where God's glory was spe- 
cially manifested. The Sethites were of the seed 
of the woman ; the Cainites were of the seed of 
the serpent. We see that in his exile Cain built 
a city, a fort, or a keep, the fear of harm and the 
instinct of self-defence being strong in his mind. 



90 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

When the Cainitcs were released from the fear 
which marred all the happiness of their progeni- 
tor, they became numerous and prosperous. 
Therefore we now first learn of the building of 
tents, and thus we see that the people must have 
had some skill in carpentry; they also showed 
that they had acquired some knowledge of spin- 
ning, weaving, and working in iron and brass for 
agricultural implements and martial weapons. 
They also manifested considerable skill in what 
may be called the fine arts. Lamech's fragment 
of song exhibits the poetical knowledge which 
the people thus early possessed; for that song, 
according to authoritative critics, possesses the 
characteristics of perfect Hebrew poetry. 

The birth of Seth Eve distinctly recognized as 
a compensation for the death of Abel. In a spe- 
cial sense she received him as a gift from God; 
and she expected that his descendants would be 
worthy to be called the " sons of God." We 
shall later see that her hope was realized, for the 
descendants of Seth were ruled by the spirit of 
God, and so were truly the sons of God. With 
the birth of Enos we are told that men began to 
call upon the name of the Lord. The interpreta- 
tion of this statement is not free from difficulties. 
Some suppose that this language means that men 
and women began profanely to use the name of 
God. It is barely possible that the words are 
capable of such a meaning; but it is more natural 
to see in them a solemn invocation of God in audi- 



SONS OF GOD AND DAUGHTERS OF MEN. 91 

ble and social prayer. This method of approach- 
ing God took place, as we have seen, at the birth of 
Enos, two hundred and thirty-five years after the 
creation of Adam. Some have supposed that the 
words mean that God's name was now called upon 
or applied to certain men. That sense of the ex- 
pression is not really opposed to the idea that men 
now began to call upon the name of the Lord. It 
seems wellnigh certain that we are here taught 
that a new method of approaching God was intro- 
duced. It is an interesting fact that up to this 
time we never read that man spoke to God, al- 
though we often read that God spoke to man. It 
is difficult correctly to appreciate the primeval 
simplicity of the thoughts then entertained re- 
garding God. Perhaps a sense of guilt, after the 
disobedience of Eden, prevented Adam and Eve 
from addressing God; and perhaps a profound 
reverence might produce the same result. The 
lines of human life are now diverging; faith is 
growing on the one side, and iniquity is increas- 
ing on the other. The race is passing beyond its 
infancy. We are not to suppose that all of the 
line of Seth were righteous, and all of the line 
of Cain iniquitous ; but believing penitents were 
chiefly in the line of Seth, and proud defiers 
chiefly in the line of Cain. The progress of evil 
showed itself in fratricide, in polygamy, and in 
many forms of violence. 



9^ OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES, 

Statistical and Genealogical. 

Dr. Murphy calls the first four chapters of Gene- 
sis the primeval Bible of mankind. With the be- 
ginning of the fifth chapter we enter upon a docu- 
ment containing a genealogy which is far-reaching 
in its relations. The fifth chapter contains the his- 
tory of the line from Adam to Noah, the genealogy 
ending with the flood. 

Dr. Joseph Parker entitles his paragraph on the 
fifth chapter, " Nobodyism. " There are, however, 
names in this chapter which shine like diamonds 
amid common stones and semi-precious jewels. 
Xoah was the second head of the line of faith and 
hope, of which Adam was the first head. Enoch 
" walked with God. " This is a remarkably 
suggestive statement in the midst of the com- 
paratively dry list of names in this chapter. 
Enoch's life was far in advance of the highest 
attainments of his ancestor Seth. Singularly 
enough we have in this connection the word God 
for the first time with the definite article — God 
with whom Enoch walked; but this sacred name 
often appears afterward with the definite article. 
He is thus clearly distinguished from all the false 
gods of all times and peoples. In Abel's offering 
we had a suggestion of an atonement; in Seth's 
time we had the devout heart voicing itself in 
prayer; and now, in Enoch's life, we have a 
man walking with God; and for three hundred 
years at least he so walked, and during this period 



SOWS OF GOD AND DAUGHTERS OF MEN. 93 

he was not withdrawn from the world, but begat 
sons and daughters, and discharged the varied 
duties of his station in life. He was accounted 
a prophet, and the epistle of Jude shows that he 
foretold the coming of the Lord. It is said after- 
ward of Noah, as now of Enoch, that he " walked 
with God," and of no other in the history is this 
affirmation made. Enoch was translated, as we 
learn in the epistle to the Hebrews, and did not 
see death. In his walking with God we have 
Eden partially restored. We are told that Me- 
thuselah lived to be nine hundred and sixty-nine 
years old. We have no warrant for supposing 
that at that time a year stood for a month now, or 
that there was any real difference in the style of 
recounting time. Perhaps the tree of life gave 
the proper support to the human constitution, 
and, perhaps also, bodily vigor was greater in 
that primeval period than now. There is no good 
reason for doubting that, by a proper observance 
of all human laws, human life might be much 
more prolonged than it is in our time ; but such a 
prolongation would not be an unmixed blessing. 
It is difficult to conceive of a life spent in the 
primeval simplicity of the days of Methuselah. 
We live more in a decade now, with our steam- 
ships, railways, telegraphs, telephones, and all 
the other multiplied activities of the closing days 
of the nineteenth century, than Methuselah could 
have lived in a millennium. We can truly say 
with Bailey in his " Festus" : 



94 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

"We live in deeds, not years; in thoughts, not breaths; 
In feelings, not in figures on a dial. 
We should count time by heart-throbs. He most lives 
Who thinks most, feels the noblest, acts the best." 

The Downward Trend. 

A long period has elapsed since the creation of 
Adam before we reach Noah, perhaps not less 
than fifteen hundred years. We are now told, 
at the opening of the sixth chapter of Genesis, 
that the race had made great progress in moral 
evil. We shall soon see that God is preparing 
to inflict summary vengeance on the guilty, if 
they will not listen to the voice of His servant 
Noah, and repent of their evil ways. The diver- 
gence between the two lines of human character 
to which reference has been made has now be- 
come very marked, but as the race began rapid- 
ly to multiply the representatives of the two 
classes came into close relation. Corrupt men 
partook in a remarkable degree of the worst qual- 
ities of the fallen Adam. The purpose of the 
sacred writer is to trace to its fountain-head the 
stream of corruption which resulted finally in 
bringing the deluge upon the world of the ungod- 
ly. Promiscuous marriages he emphasizes as the 
chief cause of genera! degeneracy, and of hasten- 
ing the judgment of God. One of the old divines 
has well said that " but for the deluge of sin there 
had not been a deluge of water." To inequality 
in the yoke of marriage, the union of believers 



SONS OF GOD AND DAUGHTERS OF MEN. 95 

with infidels, of the pious with the profane, was 
due this superfluity of wickedness. Inequality 
in marital relations led to inequality in all the re- 
lations of life. Unequal marriages resulted in the 
birth of impious sons and daughters, rather than 
of sons and daughters of God. 

The Sons of God. 

Who are meant by the " sons of Elohim," men- 
tioned in this Scripture? To this question many 
and contradictory answers have been given ; these 
questions must be fairly considered in their order. 
Several difficult questions arise at this point. 
Who were the " daughters of men"? Who were 
the " Nephilim" ? What is the meaning of "the 
Spirit's striving with men"? What of the limita- 
tion to one hundred and twenty years ? Several 
of these questions will later receive consideration ; 
but the one immediately before us is concerning 
the "sons of God." 

Some writers have said that they were sons of 
princes or other men of high rank. We know 
that in Psalm lxxxii. 6 we have this language 
when it might have that interpretation. But does 
the sacred writer here mean simply to say that 
men of high rank degraded themselves by marry- 
ing women of inferior position? This opinion was 
early held and learnedly advocated by Hebrew 
and other scholars, and in later times it was care- 
fully elaborated by Schiller. But it is now held 
by very few commentators of wide reputation, 



OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

careful scholarship, and sound judgment. It may 

at once be eliminated from our discussion. A 
ad interpretation is, that the " sons of Elo- 
him" were servants and worshippers of false gods. 
Those who hold this view make the word Elohim 
mean not the true God, but idols; they also make 
the servants or worshippers of these false gods to 
be the descendants of some pre- Adamite race. 
This view, therefore, is obliged to assume differ- 
ent centres of creation and various orders of cre- 
ated beings. If it could be proved that there was 
a pre-Adamite race, new meaning would be given 
to Romans v. 14: " Nevertheless death reigned 
from Adam to Moses, even over them that had 
not sinned after the similitude of Adam's trans- 
gression." That view makes the " daughters of 
men" to be the daughters of the Adamites, as con- 
tradistinguished from the sons of the pre-Adam- 
ites. It holds that the women thus descended 
from Adam were true in their spiritual faith and 
hip, but were now perverted by their mar- 
riage with idolatrous men. This opinion has been 
supported with striking ingenuity. It quite re- 
verses the ordinary explanation of both the classes 
mentioned in the narrative. The earlier chapters 
of Genesis, however, confine our attention simply 
to the Adamites. 

A third interpretation is that which under- 
stands by the phrase "sons of Elohim," angels. 
This explanation requires careful consideration; 
and it is not so easily disposed of as the others, 



SONS OF GOD AND DAUGHTERS OF MEN. 97 

i 

to which attention has been directed. It was 
held by some Hebrew scholars of the early days 
and of well-known repute ; it was also emphati- 
cally taught by many of the Christian fathers, and 
in our day by the learned Delitzsch, by Kurtz, and 
by so popular a writer as Canon Farrar. We 
know also that Byron, in his " Mystery of Cain," 
has taken advantage of this interpretation for 
some of his finest dramatic effects; and that 
Moore in his " Loves of the Angels" has with 
glowing imagery, poetical fervor, and rhetorical 
beauty embodied this theory, which may be so 
presented as to be attractive, but at other times 
is simply monstrous. It is only fair to those hold- 
ing this view that the grounds upon which they 
maintain it should be stated. They affirm that 
generally in the Old Testament the phrase, " the 
sons of God," is a name for the angels; and it is 
frankly admitted by those who oppose the theory 
that at times the phrase is so used in the Old- 
Testament Scriptures. But with equal earnest- 
ness it is denied that it always has this mean- 
ing. It will scarcely be claimed that this is the 
necessary meaning even in Psalm xxix. i, or 
Psalm lxxxix. 6 ; but that this is its meaning in 
Job xxxviii. 7, and in Daniel iii. 25, is generally ad- 
mitted. In these two places the phrase with its 
context certainly refers to angels. The strongest 
argument in favor of this interpretation is found 
in the epistle of Jude, and in 2 Peter ii. 4. Per- 
haps both these writers refer to the same apos- 
7 



98 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

tasy. Jude ([notes from the book of Enoch, which 
apparently indorses this view. It seems clear 
that angels possessed the power of assuming the 

human form. Without doubt this interpretation 
gave rise to many of the heathen mythologies re- 
garding the relation of the gods above to men 
and women on the earth ; and the heroes of clas- 
sical story are generally supposed to' have found 
their origin in fantastic legends of this character; 
so also probably had the vague myths of the 
Incubi and Succubi of the Middle Ages. But 
there is so mythical a character to these stories 
of the loves of the fallen angels with the daugh- 
ters of men that it becomes difficult to receive 
such an interpretation of a passage of Scripture. 
To this view reference will again be made a little 
later. 

A fourth interpretation is that which under- 
stands by the phrase "sons of God" the descend- 
ants of Seth, and by the "daughters of men" un- 
godly women. Who, then, are the " sons of God"? 
A host of commentators, some ancient, nearly all 
of the leading reformers, and many scholars of the 
present day on both sides of the sea, adopt this 
view. They make the descendants of Seth to 
marry the descendants of Cain, and to this min- 
gling of the races they refer the corruptions which 
preceded the flood. These are called the sons of 
God because they have the spirit or disposition 
of God. Those mentioned in Job xxxviii. 7, as 
joining in the symphony of the universe, seem to 



SOXS OF GOD AXD DAUGHTERS OF MEN. 99 

be an order of creatures existing before the crea- 
tion of man. As holy beings they might well be 
called the " sons of God." Those referred to in 
the Scripture we are especially considering ap- 
proached God with appropriate offerings. They 
rightly called upon His name ; and, like Enoch, 
they in some measure daily walked with God. 
By ancestry they were nominally the " sons of 
God," and in actual life they were personally the 
"sons of God." We know that the word son is 
often used in Scripture to describe a variety of 
relations. When Seth was born he was recog- 
nized as given in the place of Abel, and so, in a 
special sense, was the son of God. We have al- 
ready seen that when Enos was born men began 
to call upon the name of the Lord. They were 
thus set apart as standing in a special relation to 
God. They were believers ; they walked not after 
the flesh, but after the Spirit. They were born 
of the Spirit, were led by the Spirit, and so were 
the " sons of God. " They thus had the lofty qual- 
ities of likeness to God. Here was already the 
essential idea of the church of God. These men 
were the salt of the earth ; and, when they con- 
tracted promiscuous marriages with the heathen- 
ized races about them, they brought the corrup- 
tion of the world into the church of God. We 
cannot, therefore, think that they were angels in 
the usual sense of that term. We are distinctly 
informed that the angels neither marry nor give 
in marriage (Matthew xxii. 30). The teaching of 



too OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

Scripture seems to be that angels have no distinc- 
tion of sex, and have not the sexual affections 
characteristic of men; and, moreover, we cannot 
conceive o\ different species, even of earthly crea- 
tures, being attracted to one another in these re- 
lationships. Much less can we suppose that su- 
perhuman spirits would have affectional desires 
after human creatures. The whole narrative im- 
plies that we are in the region of humanity, and 
not of angelic beings. If these were good angels 
we can hardly suppose that they would commit 
the sin here charged, and we cannot suppose that 
if they were bad angels they would be called the 
" sons of God." We are not to give this interpre- 
tation to the statement in Jude, except it be im- 
possible otherwise to interpret the passage ; and 
it is clear that there is no absolute necessity for 
so forced an explanation. When we take the 
phrase " sons of God" to mean the pious Sethites, 
we have an interpretation which is natural, con- 
sistent, and scriptural; and it enables us to avoid 
the mythical and often suggestively monstrous 
exposition which makes the " sons as of God" to 
be angels. 

The Daughters of Men. 

By the ''daughters of men" we need not under- 
stand the daughters of the Cainitic race exclusive- 
ly; it includes the daughters of men generally. 
They were "the daughters of Adam"; they were 
the daughters of the profane and impious race of 



SO.VS OF GOD AXD DAUGHTERS OF MEN. IOI 

the "old Adam"; they had in them the nature of 
the fallen Adam. In several passages of the New 
Testament the word "men" is used as equivalent 
to fallen, degenerate, and sinful men. These 
14 sons of God" departed from the precepts of their 
early and godly training; they thus relaxed the 
strictness of their religious and social relations. 
They yielded to the fascinations of mere physical 
beauty, and their sin was that of promiscuous 
marriage, irrespective of moral and spiritual char- 
acter. 

Their Sinful Choice. 

They were governed simply by what was pleas- 
ing to the eye, as was Eve when she partook of 
the forbidden fruit. Thus it came to pass that 
"they took them wives, of all which they chose." 
Here we see laxity of choice without discernment 
of character. It has been well said that they 
chose wives, " not from the godliness of their lives, 
but for the goodliness of their looks. " Social man 
now repeated the act of individual man in the first 
sin; thus socially they apostatized from God as 
Adam did individually. The sensual triumphed 
over the spiritual; the nobler elements of the 
marital relations were debased to the level of 
mere physical attractions. Thus God's professed 
people destroyed the last hope of the church of 
that day by their profligacy. It was folly to sup- 
pose that ungodly mothers would be likely to 
train up godly children. The sin of promiscuous 



io2 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

marriages opened the way to the evils which 
finally overwhelmed the race Degeneracy of the 
whole race must now go on apace. 

Unequal Yo kings. 

We have already seen that in the seventh gen- 
eration Lamech became a polygamist. We have 
also seen that the Cainitic women possessed the 
charms of beauty, grace, and other forms of phys- 
ical attractiveness. Their very names indicate 
their personal charms; they were Adah (beauty), 
Zillah (shade), and Naamah (lovely). These 
names suggest the dominant characteristics of 
the Cainitic race. Fascinated by the charms of 
beauty, the "sons of God" cast aside all religious 
principles. They were ensnared by outward 
charms rather than by inward character. They 
did not deliberate upon the consequences of their 
sensual choices. Young men and women commit 
similar sins to-day. They are attracted by the 
charms of beauty, by the graces of mere intellec- 
tual culture, and by the fascinations of wealth and 
station. Many a woman virtually sells body and 
soul for a title, and some for a home ; and many 
a man sells all that he has for filthy lucre. Such 
marriages are not marriages in the eyes of God, 
and perhaps ought not to be so considered in the 
eyes of men. Many young men and women enter 
the marriage relation with as little thought as if 
they were birds of the air. There are marriages 
which ought for physical reasons to be forbidden 



SONS OF GOD AND DAUGHTERS OF MEN. 1 03 

by the laws of the State. We pay vastly more 
attention to laws of pedigree, heredity, and affin- 
ity among animals than we do among men and 
women. One's heart is saddened as he thinks of 
the reckless manner in which many enter the 
bonds of holy matrimony. It is sufficiently diffi- 
cult for a man to climb the rugged heights of fame 
when his wife keeps equal step by his side ; but it 
is almost impossible for him to climb when he 
must drag her up by main force. Many men and 
women become engaged in early youth, the man 
to pursue courses of liberal education, and the 
woman to starve in the daily routine of domestic 
duties. Soon an impassable intellectual chasm 
will separate them. They grow apart, and broken 
lives and bleeding hearts are the inevitable re- 
sult. Tennyson in " Locksley Hall" tells the sad 
story : 

"He will hold thee, when his passion shall have spent its 
novel force, 
Something better than his dog, a little dearer than his 
horse." 

Often the case is reversed, and the other words of 
Tennyson have their sorrowful application : 

" As the husband is, the wife is ; thou art mated with a clown, 
And the grossness of his nature will have weight to drag 
thee down." 

God help the girls who marry young men to re- 
form them. They are undertaking a tremendous 
responsibility. God help the girls the breath of 



l©4 OLD TESTA MR XT DIFFICULTIES. 

whose lovers is tainted with intoxicating drink. 

There is little before such but fearful anxiety, 
hopeless sorrow, and indescribable grief. Too 

often in the marriage relation the bad corrupts 
the good, and the good does not convert the 
bad. Wrecked lives, broken homes, and bleeding 
hearts are the almost inevitable results of such 
marriages. O Christian men and women, be not 
unequally yoked with unbelievers. Marry in 
the Lord. What fellowship can light have with 
darkness, the church with the world, Christ with 
Belial? 

Glorious is the river Rhone as it leaps from the 
Rhone glacier, more than five thousand feet above 
the sea. Turbid are its waters as it enters Lake 
Geneva ; but stand on this bridge and watch it as 
it issues from the lake, with the clearness of 
heaven* s blue, and with the swiftness of an ar- 
row. Nearly two miles below Geneva, the Arve, 
milky with powdered granite, pours its waters 
against the cerulean Rhone. The Rhone resists 
the proposed union. Side by side they run for 
many miles, the milky Arve and the azure Rhone. 
Slowly but surely the muddy waters of the Arve 
are gaining the ascendancy. Standing upon the 
bridge at Lyons the mighty river rolls beneath 
us, a muddy, milky stream, and so pours its wa- 
ters into the Gulf of Lyons, after its course of six 
hundred miles has been run. God help us that 
the heavenly purity of our Christian lives may 
never become the muddy waters of earth, when 



SONS OF GOD AND DAUGHTERS OF MEN. 105 

the streams of other lives are mingled with ours 
in our marriage relations. God help our young 
men and women to live for truth, for honor, for 
love, for God, for Heaven! 



VII. 

DOES GOD REPENT AND THE SPIRIT 
WITHDRAW ? 



VII. 
Does God Repent and the Spirit Withdraw? 

This is a startling heading for a chapter or an 
article, but it is full)' justified by the narrative in 
the sixth chapter of Genesis, beginning with the 
third verse and ending with the eighth verse. 
The human race is approaching a fearful crisis. 
The cup of divine judgment is almost full. The 
whole race is on probation. Part of it has re- 
ceived God's gracious approbation, but the greater 
part must suffer His righteous reprobation. We 
are brought face to face with the terrible fact that 
man is unworthy to be longer the tenant of the 
glorious temple erected by God for his occupancy. 
It is difficult to exaggerate the language of the 
Scripture, which describes man's sinfulness be- 
fore God. Man has become flesh rather than 
spirit; and the temporal and sensual have tri- 
umphed over the spiritual and eternal. Man has 
become renowned for violence rather than honor- 
able for reverence. A deluge of evil will be fol- 
lowed by a deluge of water. The whole race, 
with the exception of one family, must suffer the 
infliction of God's righteous judgment. 



HO OLD TES TA MENT DIFFICUL TIES. 

The Spirit Chasing to Strive. 

The language of the third verse of this chapter 
is somewhat obscure, but is tremendously solemn. 
We suppose the spirit here named is the Ruach 
Elohim. Here, as already taught us in the in- 
spired narrative, the plurality of the Godhead is 
implied. When we read the words, " Jehovah 
said," we understand that God spoke to Himself 
or to others in the sacred Trinity. The language 
is equivalent to saying that God purposed or re- 
solved upon the course of action later described. 
There is some difference of opinion as to the ex- 
act meaning of the word translated "strive." It 
may mean to keep down, to rule, or to judge ; it 
has in it usually the thought of reproving in some 
judicial sense. It might, indeed, mean that God's 
spirit might not longer be humbled by dwelling 
in man, because he has become flesh. By flesh 
we are to understand sinful beings, and not sim- 
ply corporeal creatures. The word basilar is here 
used in its ethical significance, as is the word 
sarks, flesh, in the New Testament. Possibly the 
idea of the carnal man, as distinguished from the 
spiritual, so often expressed by the Apostle Paul, 
has its origin in this verse. 

It is a solemn but blessed fact that the Spirit 
of God docs strive with men. Our Lord taught 
us that one of the offices of the Holy vSpirit, when 
:ne in 1 1 is fulness, would be to "re- 
prove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and 



DOES GOD REPENT? HI 

of judgment." We see the Spirit, thus early in 
the history of the race, engaged in this blessed 
work. In the negative statement contained in 
this verse we have shining* forth the bright light 
of God's mercy to sinful man. His Spirit comes 
to illumine their darkness, to arouse their con- 
science, and, if possible, to win their affection to 
truth and to God. We cannot too strongly em- 
phasize this blessed truth. Graciously does the 
Spirit call to mind former judgments; lovingly 
does He present persuasive arguments, and re- 
peatedly does He emphasize encouraging prom- 
ises. During the period of one hundred and 
twenty years the Spirit did thus intercede for God 
with the antediluvian world. But the striving of 
the Spirit implies resistance on the part of men, 
and that resistance may so increase that the Spirit 
may finally entirely withdraw. The Spirit's with- 
drawal forbodes temporal and eternal destruction. 
There certainly is a point beyond which He will 
not go in His entreaties with men. In harmony 
with our freedom and God's divine purpose the 
Spirit will not exercise force on the wills of men. 
God will not interfere with the law of freedom 
which He has established in His control with free 
moral agents. Involuntary obedience is not obe- 
dience. Compulsory love, faith, and hope are a 
contradiction in terms. The Spirit of God ceases 
to strive with men when they drive him from 
their hearts. The whole world is vocal with 
God's calls of mercy; the very air we breathe is 



ii^ OLD TES TAMEN T DIFFICl r L TIES. 

laden with God's gracious ministries. The Spirit 
pleads, wrestles, and even agonizes with men. 
Nothing in human thought is more wonderful 
than God's patience with the disobedient and re- 
bellious. The history of the world is a history of 
rebellion against God. Think of the sins of that 
antediluvian world, so aggravated and so heinous! 
God was patient with men, even though they were 
ripe for destruction. He could do nothing more 
then, he can do nothing more now to induce men 
to repent, without interfering with their moral 
freedom. The Spirit of God knocks at all the 
doors of the heart, but the time will come when 
He will depart and leave men to the terrible fate 
which they have brought upon themselves. God 
condemns no soul to eternal death; men bring 
condemnation upon themselves. They are lost 
because they wish to be lost; a little reflection 
will show that this statement is true in its deepest 
meaning. Every man will go where, in his deep- 
est heart, he wishes to go. God's providence 
simply registers the judgment which men pass 
upon themselves. The time will come, if men 
continue to resist the Spirit, when God must say 
of each soul, " Cut it down, why cumbereth it the 
ground?" We all may well pray with the Psalm- 
. "Take not thy Holy Spirit from me." 
We now see that God declares that man's days 
are to be one hundred and twenty years. It seems 
clear that the reference here is not to the life of 
men, but to that of the race, before the coming 



DOES GOD REPENT? 1 13 

of God's primitive judgment. The writer goes 
back to a point of time already passed over, the 
time before the birth of Shem, Ham, and Japheth; 
one hundred years intervened between their birth 
and the flood. It thus seems certain that the ref- 
erence is to the period of grace allowed the nation, 
because, while we are not told of men living, after 
the end of this period, nine hundred years and 
upward, we know that Noah, Abram, and others, 
from Shem to Terah, greatly exceeded the limit 
of one hundred and twenty years. Man is thus 
seen to be flesh, to be dominantly carnal; the 
breath which the Almighty breathed into his nos- 
trils is triumphed over by the corporeal nature. 
His day of grace is therefore limited. By his 
act in building the ark as well as by his word in 
preaching the truth, Noah is to exhort, warn, and 
rebuke. We are told that Noah was a just man, 
that he was perfect in his generation, and that 
he walked with God ; these are certainly marked 
qualities of excellence. The evening of oppor- 
tunity has come to the doomed race. Their cup 
is rapidly filling, and its terrible contents will 
soon be poured out. 

Who Were the Giants ? 

We are told in the fourth verse that there " were 
giants in the earth in those days." These were 
men of vigorous bodies and of violent wills. 

The word translated giants is rather descriptive 

of cruelty than of great strength, These giants 
8 



M4 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

were not the issue of the promiscuous marriages, 
to which reference is here made, for they existed 
before that time. They ought not then to be con- 
founded with the children of these mixed mar- 
riages, as the latter form a separate class. It is 
perhaps unfortunate that the original word is 
translated by our word giants. The Septuagint 
is responsible for this translation, as it gives lis 
the word gigantes % which literally signifies earth- 
born, but we have translated it giants, and thus 
conveyed the idea that these were persons of enor- 
mous size. The Hebrew word is nephilim; this 
word is derived from naplial, meaning to fall. It 
may refer to apostates, fallen from God and the 
true faith, and then to violent men, such as ty- 
rants, usurpers, and oppressors, who fell upon 
their fellow-men. Later in this verse we have 
the gt'bborim ; they were " mighty men, impetuous, 
heroic men." The whole subject of the Anakim, 
Nephilim^ Gibborim, Rcpliaim, Rmin, and Zuzim y 
variously translated by our word giants and by 
similar terms, is obscure to a remarkable degree. 
Calvin calls these men "the first nobility of the 
world; honorable robbers, who boasted of their 
wickedness." Some have doubted whether they 
were men of large physical stature; but perhaps 
it is not at all surprising that there were physical 
giants in that early day. The primitive records 
of most nations contain stories of gigantic men 
and women. This is true of Great Britain and 
most European countries. The possibility of gi- 



DOES GOD REPENT? 115 

gantic human creatures is in harmony with the 
great structures, such as the pyramids and the 
great gates of ancient cities; and geological in- 
vestigations reveal to us gigantic ferns, trees, and 
mosses, and in the animal kingdom we have evi- 
dences of the megatherium and other enormous 
creatures, which may have inhabited the world 
in the earlier day. 

God Vindicated. 

Beginning with the fifth verse and going to the 
end of the eighth verse, we have a striking vindi- 
cation of God in His terrible acts of judgment. 
We see here that God did not act in haste> and as 
the result of a sudden impulse. We are told that 
He carefully observed the wickedness of His crea- 
tures. The description of the sinfulness of man 
is minute and accurate. The sin of the race was 
not local and limited, and was not characterized 
by ordinary corruption. The one hundred and 
twenty years of grace have passed, and the ini- 
quity of man was widespread and deep-seated. 
Nothing could surpass the carefulness of the de- 
scription here given of man's sin. It had reached 
a fearful climax. It was characterized by brutal 
outrage and abominable lust. We are told at the 
outset that men had become flesh ; that they no 
longer discerned their high destiny, but were 
brutalized and sensualized. We are next im- 
pressed with the fact that the wickedness of men 
was not simply an accident but a state. They 



OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

were COXTUpt within and without. Their wicked- 
ness, — ra'ath) from the root raa y to make a loud 
. , to rage, hence to be wicked — "was multi- 
plied," and it was continually increasing-. Mar- 
vellously Strong is the statement in the latter 
part of the fifth verse, regarding- the sinfulness 
of "every imagination (yctscr, a device) of the 
thoughts of his heart." We are here taught that 
the very materials out of which ideas were formed 
were evil. The embryo of every thought was 
sinful ; the deepest fountain of life was poisoned. 
The picture is still more fully darkened by the 
thought that this unmixed evil was without in- 
terval of good. It was evil continually, literally, 
every day. This is the most terrific picture of 
fallen souls to be found in any literature. The 
more carefully one studies the words of the origi- 
nal, the more awful does the picture become. 
Instead of having the excellences of a Seth, an 
Enoch, or a Noah, we have men and women 
possessed of the darkest features of a diabolical 
character, which the strongest Hebrew w r ords can 
describe. 

God Repenting. 

We are not surprised that we should read in the 
sixth verse that "it repented Jehovah that he had 
made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his 

heart." These are startling words. How are we 
to understand 111 is language' Can God repent? 
Do not the Scriptures say that lie cannot? In 



DOES GOD REPENT? II 7 

Numbers xxiii. 19 we read: " God is not a man, 
that he should lie ; neither the son of man, that 
he should repent. Hath he said and shall he not 
do it, or hath he spoken and shall he not make it 
good?" And in 1 Samuel xv. 29 we read: "And 
also the strength of Israel will not lie nor repent ; 
for he is not a man that he should repent." 
These are strong words. Can a God of infinite 
perfection be grieved at His heart? Does not the 
suggestion even of this possibility detract from 
the glory of God's perfection? If rightly under- 
stood we shall find that this language gives us 
new, tender, and beautiful conceptions of the 
mighty and loving God our Saviour. We have 
here an illustration of what has been called the 
frankness, even the imprudence, of Scripture. 
Scripture must be compared with Scripture, in 
order that we may get its teaching in entirety. 
The word yinuahcm, repented, is from naham, 
to pant, to groan, and finally to grieve. It re- 
minds us of the German rcuen and the English 
rite. Let us remember that when repentance 
is ascribed to God we must not suppose that it 
implies a change of purpose in the Almighty. 
When we attribute this act to God it is expres- 
sive of our conception of God rather than of God's 
essential character. The language is rather the 
manner of men ; it is simply and frankly anthro- 
popathic speech. Thus understood it is perfectly 
intelligible. We cannot speak of God o-r to God, 
or He to us, unless language is adopted which we 



t t 8 01 n TES TAMENT DIFFICUL TIES. 

can understand. As far hack, however, as the 
days of the Seventy an attempt was made to soften 
this language; but such an attempt is utterly un- 
necessary to a true understanding of the Scrip- 
ture. In harmony with the anthropopathic prin- 
ciple, it speaks of God's hands, eyes, ears, and 
feet. The meaning simply is, that God has power 
to perform the acts which we perform in the use 
of these parts of our bodies. Thus the Scripture 
represents Him as exercising the passions of 
anger, love, and grief which we discover in our- 
selves unavoidably. We must reason about God 
in the use of comparison and analogy. Repent- 
ance in God is a change in His attitude toward 
men, rather than a change in His mind and will. 
An old divine thus speaks: " Repentance with 
man is the change of will; repentance with God is 
the willing of a change. " The language used here 
of God gives us a wonderful picture of the tender- 
ness of His fatherly heart. His heart is grieved 
even when he permits the blow of justice to fall. 
It lias been well said that " though the divine pur- 
pose is immutable, the divine nature is not im- 
ible." God's heart is pitiful as the heart of 
the tenderest earthly father, and gentle as that of 
the most loving mother. We are sure that not 
until men rejected, grieved, and despised His 
y Spirit was the punishment of their sin in- 
flicted. We must not deny to God the attributes 
of freedom, personality, holiness, and justice. 
We may be sure that this statement regarding 



DOES GOD REPENT? 1 19 

God, in some way not fully known to lis, implies 
processes analogous to those of the human heart 
and will. In God are found attributes which to 
us may seem to be inharmonious and contradic- 
tory, but which in Him are in eternal and glori- 
ous unison. 

Righteous Noah. 

The eighth verse teaches us that " Noah found 
grace in the eyes of Jehovah." The various de- 
scriptions of Noah in this connection are pecul- 
iarly attractive. They set him before us as a man 
of a beautifully balanced character. His name 
means "rest," or " consolation, " and probably in 
giving it his father believed that he was the prom- 
ised deliverer. The old man's sad heart turns 
with hope to the birth of his son ; but Lamech 
was deceived in his hope regarding Noah, as Eve 
was mistaken in the birth of Cain. Nevertheless 
we feel the charm of Noah's beautiful name. He 
was the tenth from Adam in the line of Seth. He 
is the first man whom the Scriptures call " just." 
We are glad to read that he found grace in the 
sight of Jehovah. For the first time " grace," 
which in evangelical theology has so tender and 
beautiful a meaning, finds expression in a word. 
God's love, revealing itself in human character in 
Abel, in Enoch, and in Noah, here reaches a higher 
elevation. 

We now have revealed to us the blessed foun- 
tain whence comes true nobility of character and 



i2o OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

likeness to God. Noah was a preacher of right- 
eousness. This truth must ever be emphasized, 
and the passage in i Peter iii. 18-20 should be 
studied in the light of this antediluvian history, 
personal and general. We there learn that the 
Spirit of Christ, through the instrumentality of 
the pious patriarch, preached to the disobedient 
spirits of the old world. This passage occupies 
a prominent place in modern theological discus- 
sions. It has been cited in support of a second 
probation, and in proof of a purgatory. We 
ought to bear in mind that the spirits, to whom 
reference is thus made, are the souls of those men 
in prison who once heard the Gospel, and enjoyed 
the opportunity but rejected the duty of repent- 
ance. By the Spirit of Christ we may understand 
either the Holy Spirit or the divine nature of 
Christ. These men w r ere the sinners destroyed 
by the flood ; their spirits, shades, or manes, were 
popularly supposed to be imprisoned in the caves 
of the earth. To these spirits Christ, through 
Noah, preached during their lifetime. The fables 
of the Greeks that the earthquakes were caused 
by the efforts of imprisoned giants to shake off 
the mountains heaped upon them, have their ori- 
gin in the tradition respecting the fate of these 
antediluvian rebels, who were shut up in subter- 
ranean regions because of their rebellion against 
God. These antediluvian sinners were those 
" which some time (once or formerly) were diso- 
bedient" , "the long-suffering of God waited in 



DOES GOD REPENT? 121 

the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing." 
If Christ had gone after His death and had 
preached to these spirits, we should have read, 
"waited until after Christ's death." 

Scholars have given us examples from Demos- 
thenes and other Greek writers, as well as from 
the Scriptures, to show that the phrase, " he went 
and preached," is simply a pleonasm for "he 
preached." We have a suggestive example of 
this construction in Ephesians ii. 15-17, "having 
abolished . . . came and preached peace to you 
which were afar off, and to them that were nigh." 
It is certain that after His resurrection Christ did 
not personally go to the Gentiles to preach to 
them ; He went by His apostles. We are familiar 
with the Latin phrase, Qui facit per aliiun, facit 
per se. Paul in writing to the Ephesians repre- 
sents Christ as doing that which He did do through 
His apostles. In like manner Peter represents 
Christ as doing that which He did through Noah. 
Peter spoke of the antediluvians who at the time 
he wrote were spirits in prison ; that is certainly 
the fair meaning of his words. This is the only 
passage in the New Testament on which the Ro- 
man doctrine of purgatory is supposed to rest ; it 
is the passage also on which some base their be- 
lief in a second probation. It is also one author- 
ity for the clause in the so-called Apostles' Creed 
relating to the descent into hell; but we know 
that this creed was repeated for hundreds of years 
before this clause was introduced. No one knows 



122 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

by whom or when it was inserted. In its present 
form, this creed cannot be traced to a period 
earlier than about the middle of the eighth cen- 
tury. This scripture is certainly a foundation of 
sand for both these groundless theories. The 
argument from this passage, promising a second 
probation to those who die in ignorance of Christ, 
is wholly irrelevant. These spirits in prison did 
not die in ignorance of God's word and will; for 
they had frequent and solemn warnings. Divine 
patience waited until divine mercy was exhausted. 
Even if it be granted that Christ did in person 
preach in hades, there is no evidence that any 
spirits there confined repented or were liberated 
therefrom. This passage suggests hopelessness 
rather than hopefulness, even granting, what is 
not taught in Scripture, that Christ did teach in 
person in the region of lost souls. We know that 
but one voice came from that dark region, as 
taught us by our Lord, and it was a voice of hope- 
less misery and of sinful unbelief ; that voice gives 
us the only example in the Bible of a prayer offered 
to a saint, and that prayer came from hell and was 
never answered. Romanists certainly have not 
much encouragement to pray to saints. 

Solemn are the echoes coming to us from the 
antediluvian world. Does God's Spirit strive 
with any to-day? Grieve not the Holy Spirit. 
Quench not the heavenly flame. Resist not the 
loving voice. Joyously yield to the gracious 
promptings of the divine Spirit. Let the prayer 



DOES GOD REPENT? 1 23 

of every heart be, with the deepest tenderness and 
solicitude, that of the Psalmist in his sincere re- 
pentance, " Cast me not away from thy presence, 
and take not thy Holy Spirit from me." 



VIII. 

WAS THE NOACHIAN FLOOD UNIVERSAL 
OR LOCAL? 



VIII. 

WAS THE NOACHIAN FLOOD UNIVER- 
SAL OR LOCAL? 

The account of the ark, the deluge, the assuag- 
ing of the waters, and God's covenant with Noah 
is found in the book of Genesis, sixth, seventh, 
and eighth chapters. We have already seen that 
the cup of God's righteous judgment was full. 
The deluge of sin is now about to bring a deluge 
of water ; but it is to be a lustral wave that shall 
sweep over the corrupt earth. We are familiar 
with the covenant given to Noah to prepare an 
ark and to enter therein with his family. 

The Ark. 

It is difficult to know the exact meaning of the 
Hebrew word tebath, translated ark. The word 
is found only here and in Exodus ii. 3, where it is 
applied to the basket in which the mother of 
Moses laid her babe. A different word is used, 
aron, for the ark of the covenant (Exodus xxv. 
10). The ark which Noah was commanded to 
make was to consist of gopher or cypress wood, if 
we mean any particular species of tree ; this wood, 
because of its lightness and durability, the Phoeni ■ 
cians used for building their vessels, the Athenians 



OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

their cotlins, and the Egyptians their mummy- 
These trees were such as contained pitch, 
turpentine, and similar resinous materials. We 
know that the ark was divided into a number of 
small compartments placed in three tiers, and we 
also know that light was admitted through open- 
ings called windows; but great obscurity attaches 
to the word tzohar, translated window. It is 
likely that it was a series of light and air holes of 
lattice-work. A different word is used for the 
window, Jialon, which Noah is said to have opened 
at the end of. forty days. The word tzoliar implies 
that the window was in some way connected with 
the transmission of light, as it comes from a root 
meaning shining. It w T as probably a collective 
term for skylights, in which there may have been 
revolving lattices, or some transparent substance 
with which we are not familiar. The door of the 
ark must have been of considerable size to admit 
the various animals, and it must also have been 
above the highest point which the water vould 
reach ; perhaps the word translated door is also to 
be used in a collective sense, implying a number 
of openings in the different stories of the ark. 

We are told that the ark was 300 cubits long, 50 
cubits wide, and 30 cubits high. What w r as the 
length of a cubit? The cubit later in Jewish his- 
came to be six hand-breadths, or about 
twenty-one inches; this was known as the sacred 
cubit, although there was a common cubit of eigh- 
teen inches. Taking the longer of these measures 



WAS THE FLOOD UNIVERSAL OR LOCAL? 129 

as correct, the ark would be 525 feet long, 87 feet 
wide, and 52 feet and 6 inches high. The Great 
Eastern is 680 feet long, 691 on deck, S3 feet 
wide, and 58 feet deep. The ark was intended 
only to float, to have ample storage, and to keep 
reasonably steady on the waters. It was a great 
oblong floating house, a building in the form of a 
parallelogram. It was without sails or rudder ; it 
was not a boat in any modern sense. It has been 
estimated that it would carry at least 20,000 men 
with ample provision for six months, besides eigh- 
teen pieces of cannon. It was not, of course, in- 
tended to move rapidly through the waters. We 
are told that Peter Jansen, a Dutch Mennonite 
merchant, constructed in the year 1609, at Hoorn, 
a vessel on the same model as the ark. His vessel 
was 120 feet long, 20 feet broad, and 12 feet deep. 
It is also said to have been w T ell adapted to freight- 
age, but not appropriate for a long voyage. This 
great vessel failed to accomplish any practical 
purpose, as it was soon broken to pieces by the 
waves. The ark of Noah was a colossal oblong 
chest, smeared with bitumen, and, although well 
suited for the purpose for which it was con- 
structed, it would not have been of practical ser- 
vice outside of that purpose. It is also known 
that several vessels called fleuten, or floats, were 
built in Denmark after the proportions of the ark. 



13° OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

The Animals in the Ark. 

Did Noah literally take into the ark a pair of 
the animals of the whole world? The answer to 
this question depends upon the question, " Was the 
flood universal or local?" Could all the animals 
of the world, by sevens or by pairs, with food 
sufficient for a year, have been stored away in the 
ark? This question has been often asked, and de- 
tailed mathematical answers have been frequently 
given. Hugh Miller, in his " Testimony of the 
Rocks," takes up the question in a practical way. 
He quotes Sir Walter Raleigh's calculations on 
the subject, but it must be borne in mind that Sir 
Walter proposed space for less than one hundred 
distinct species of creatures. His calculations 
are remarkably interesting, as he arranges the 
animals in one story, the birds in another, and 
the provisions in another, with ample space for 
Noah and his family. There were still earlier 
classifications of animals and birds, making the 
number of species larger than that given by Sir 
Walter Raleigh; but the knowledge which we 
now possess of the animal kingdom throws all 
these calculations into utter confusion. Buffon 
made the distinct species of animals and birds 
double what Sir Walter reckoned; and now, so 
astonishing is the progress made, we should 
have to make the number of species many times 
greater than that which Buffon gives. A great 
world is open to us which was entirely unknown 



WAS THE FLOOD UNIVERSAL OR LOCAL? 131 

even a few generations ago. Vast discoveries are 
made in every department of inquiry. These 
facts incidentally show, what later will be proved 
from other considerations, that the flood was only 
local and not general, only partial and not uni- 
versal. To believe that the flood was universal is 
to believe in continuous miracles of the most 
stupendous character, and miracles as needless 
for the moral purpose for which the flood came as 
they would have been gigantic in themselves. 
All who believe in an infinite God believe that 
He could have performed all these miracles. The 
only question is, Did He perform them? From 
all that we know of God's methods we are abun- 
dantly warranted in saying that He is invariably 
economical in the displays of His power, and that 
He thus always keeps the miraculous element at 
a minimum. 

Then we have, if w T e believe in a universal 
flood, to get the animals from the ends of the 
earth. This could not be done, except again by 
continuous miracles of an enormous nature. 
Once it was held that all the animals which now 
are found in all parts of the globe originally pro- 
ceeded from some common centre, such as the 
ark might easily have occupied; but no reputable 
zoologist, no reasonably intelligent man, reason- 
ably well acquainted with the numbers and dis- 
tribution of species, will venture now to express 
such an opinion. Attention has often been called 
by writers on this subject to the fact that South 



13a OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES, 

America has animals totally distinct from those of 
Europe, Asia, or Africa, and Australia has a 
whole elass of marsupials utterly unknown in 
other parts of the world. New Zealand has birds 
so ill-provided with wings that they can only run 
on the ground. It is also affirmed by competent 
authorities that this remarkable distribution of 
species existed long before the period of the 
deluge. 

False Views of God. 

It is astonishing that some interpreters of the 
Bible think that they honor God and the Bible by 
taxing our credulity to the utmost, \vhen the fact 
is that by so doing they dishonor both God and the 
Bible. They put God, to some degree at least, 
into the category of heathen deities, delighting in 
vast displays of power, without necessity, without 
reason, and without wisdom; and they do some- 
thing toward reducing the Bible to a level with 
the senseless legends of barbaric gods and myth- 
ological deities. We ought to thank God for the 
larger element of sanctified common sense which 
now enters into the interpretations of the oracles 
of God. This element honors alike God and the 
Bible. Only by continuous miracles could the 
animals be brought into the ark. How could the 
sloth and the armadillo have been brought across 
continents and seas from their home in South 
America? How the kangaroo from the forests 
and prairies of Australia? How the polar bear 



WAS THE FLOOD UNIVERSAL OR LOCAL? 133 

from the icebergs of polar regions? How were 
the carnivorous animals supplied with food dur- 
ing the year's abode in the ark? Were these 
animals miraculously supplied with food? Were 
their teeth and digestive organs so changed that 
they could live on vegetables? To care for a year 
for even the limited number of animals which 
have their home in Noah's vicinity, it has well 
been said, must have been a task not easy of ac- 
complishment. To care for all the animals which 
would have been collected together, if the flood 
were universal, would have been absolutely im- 
possible, except by daily miracles of the most 
enormous character. 

But was not Noah told to take two of every liv- 
ing thing of all flesh into the ark? Most assuredly. 
But how would he understand such a command? 
Would it suggest to him armadillos from South 
America, kangaroos from Australia, polar bears 
from the North Pole? Surely not. He would 
understand it — how could he understand it other- 
wise? — to mean two of every kind known to him. 
Surely he was not a zoological professor. Would 
any one with sense, except for a few misunder- 
stood expressions in the narrative, ever suppose 
that Noah or Moses had such a conception of the 
meaning of God's words as a belief in a universal 
deluge supposes? Noah and Moses could hardly 
have been nineteenth-century zoologists. How 
could they, after the subsidence of the flood, have 
been carried back to the distant countries whence 



134 OLD TESTAMENT DIEEICULTIES. 

they came? Who could have transported them? 
By what ships or railways did they come and go? 
How have all vestiges of their journey back and 
forth been concealed? It is quite too bad that 
certain classes of biblical students have thought 
that they honored the Bible by making it as diffi- 
cult as possible of belief. Thank God, wiser 
methods of investigation and interpretation now 
prevail. We can still believe in God and in the 
Bible without taking farewell of sound reason, 
clear judgment, and common sense. 

The Bible Narrative. 

Does the Bible teach that the flood was univer- 
sal? That is the chief, really the only, question. 
If it does I accept its statements, even though to 
me they are inexplicable. But the Bible does not 
so affirm. Fairly interpreted, it makes no such 
statement. Explaining Scripture by Scripture, we 
shall see that its strongest expressions are capable 
of being interpreted in harmony with the idea of 
a local flood. True, it speaks of the destruction 
of " all flesh" and of " all in whose nostrils was the 
breath of life" ; but how did the writer understand 
such language? Was he referring to North or 
South America, to Australia, to China, to Japan? 
Did he not mean all in his own locality? Did he 
not mean all the world which he knew? How 
could he have meant anything else? Was he not 
using such language as is used constantly in the 
Bible, when clearly only a limited locality is in- 



WAS THE FLOOD UNIVERSAL OR LOCAL? 135 

tended ? Let the Bible interpret the Bible. Let 
us read it when it says, " All countries came into 
Egypt to buy corn." What countries, America, 
Europe, Australia? Clearly the countries with 
which the writer was familiar. Hear another 
passage, this time from the New Testament: " A 
decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the 
world should be taxed." What world? Are we 
to take such passages in an absolutely literal sense? 
Such an interpretation would be nonsense. It 
was all the world with which those concerned 
were familiar. The words of Obadiah in i Kings 
xviii. 10, "There is no nation or kingdom whither 
my lord hath not sent to seek thee," no one ever 
dreams of interpreting literally. One of the 
strongest expressions in the narrative of the del- 
uge is, " All the high hills which were under the 
whole heaven." But this is no stronger than an- 
other Scripture which says, " This day will I begin 
to put the dread of thee and the fear of thee upon 
the nations that arc under the whole heaven. " 
Even the terms of the blessing promised Noah 
after the flood, though it regards Noah as the 
head of a new human family and the representa- 
tive of a new race, can all be interpreted by sup- 
posing that the flood, in the mind of the writer, 
was universal only in the sense that it extended 
to the whole world as then known. 

There is no reason for supposing that the ark 
rested on one of the peaks now called Ararat ; for 
Ararat was a country, and not simply a moun- 



i3 6 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

tain ; and a range like that of the Zagros would 
answer all the purposes of the narrative. The 
local tradition, which finds parts of the ark on the 
top of the mountain, is, of course, of no authority 
whatever. 

Some great and sudden subsidence of the land 
accompanied by an in-rush of the waters of the 
Persian Gulf, or some other body of water, to- 
gether with the rain for one hundred and ninety 
days, would comply with all the conditions of the 
breaking up of the great deep and the opening of 
the windows of heaven. In the year 1819 a severe 
earthquake shock caused a great depression in a 
part of the salt marsh called the " Runn of 
Kuteh," in India, and many lives were lost and a 
vast inland sea was soon formed. No reference 
in the sacred narrative is made to any land, or to 
any world, except that portion of the earth's sur- 
face known to the writer. That territory, and an 
unknown margin adjoining it, were covered with 
water. The Scripture says nothing of distant 
portions of Asia, Europe, America, Africa, or 
Australia; and when the Scripture is silent we 
ought not to speak. We ought not to be wise 
above that which is written. The writer speaks 
constantly as an eye-witness; and within his hor- 
izon all the hills were covered. 

We are at this time removed from Adam by ten 
rations, including Noah's. A careful esti- 
mate of population would give us from three to 
four millions in the time of Xoah ; and every in- 



WAS THE FLOOD UXIVERSAL OR LOCAL? 137 

dication suggests that the population was confined 
to a limited territory. Dr. Murphy expresses the 
opinion that an area equal to that of the British 
Isles would be amply sufficient for the entire 
population of men, women, and children. It is 
easy to locate a territory of this size where the 
subsidence would be a comparatively easy matter, 
even as judged by recent inundations in different 
parts of the earth. The earth which was sub- 
merged is the earth which was corrupt before God ; 
it was the earth which was filled with violence. 
It was this earth, and not any other, which was 
destroyed by the flood. It is easy to see how a 
people of four millions could be living in the great 
basin of the Euphrates and Tigris, and how an 
area in the vicinity of the Indian Ocean, the Per- 
sian Gulf, the Caspian, the Black, the Mediterra- 
nean, and the Red seas could readily be sub- 
merged, in full harmony with the teaching of the 
Scriptures, while the rest of the universe would 
not be affected. It must ever be borne in mind 
that the description is by a man and from his 
point of view, and not from the point of view of 
the all-seeing God. It is absolutely certain that 
the Bible does not affirm that the whole globe was 
covered with water. If the Bible did so affirm, I 
should believe it without any hesitancy whatever ; 
but we have no right to read into God's word our 
unwarranted thought ; we ought to get out of 
God's word simply His authoritative teaching. 



ijS oi.I) TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

Addi noNAL Difficulties. 

The astronomical difficulties in the way of a 

universal flood are insuperable. If the flood were 
universal, the water must have risen several miles 

e the sea-level. Such an increase of water 
would have affected the equatorial diameter of the 
earth and its orbit around the sun, and would 
have increased the sun's attraction on the planets; 
and thus disorder would have been produced 
throughout the remotest regions of space. After 
the waters had been assuaged enormous changes 
would have been necessary again in order that the 
former relations of the heavenly bodies might be 
reestablished. God would have had practically 
to create the world anew. Can we conceive that 
this enormous series of miracles could have oc- 
curred simply for the punishment of a compara- 
tively small number of people inhabiting a limited 
portion of the earth's surface? God does not 
waste power in this way. The geological objec- 
tions are scarcely less great than the astronomical. 
The zoological difficulty, as we have already sug- 

(1, is perhaps greater than either the geo- 
logical or the astronomical. Had there been a 
general deluge, apart from continuous miracles, 
there would have been a general destruction of 
marine life. The changing depths of water would 
have destroyed the coral reefs of the Pacific. Yet 
Noah does not seem to have taken any kind of 
marine animals into the ark. A general deluge 



WAS THE FLOOD UNIVERSAL OR LOCAL? 139 

would have entirely changed the climate of the 
whole world ; it would have destroyed all kinds of 
fresh-water fish, and such a submergence of the 
land in sea-water would have brought destruction 
upon all terrestrial plants. We have no reason to 
suppose that Noah took any stock of such plants 
into the ark. It was once supposed — and the old 
books may yet so affirm — that geological discover- 
ies confirmed the opinion that the deluge was uni- 
versal. The existence of shells and corals upon 
the high mountains was supposed to be evidence 
of the universality of the deluge. Voltaire once 
found it difficult to answer the arguments of those 
who cited the existence of fossil shells on high 
mountains, and his arguments to explain away 
these supposed evidences are as childish as the 
evidences themselves were imaginary. Greater 
knowledge removes the difficulties inseparable 
from the belief in a universal deluge, and enables 
us readily to accept the statements of God's word. 
All these considerations, therefore, lead us to be- 
lieve that the flood was local. The moral purpose 
for which it occurred is fully subserved by a 
limited, rather than by a general, deluge. Ac- 
cepting this view, nearly all difficulties vanish. 
With charming simplicity, as well as marvellous 
sublimity, the Bible narrates the story. Its nar- 
rative is free from the heart-rending scenes which 
the painters have so often depicted. The two 
ideas constantly dwelt upon in the Bible are the 
blotting out of the sinful race in the submergence 



140 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

of the polluted earth, as far as the eye could see, 
and the absolute safety of -Noah and his family in 
the ark. The sending out of the dove, and its 
final return with the fresh olive leaf, is one of the 
most charming of pictures. In Psalm xxix. 10, 
the poet sings of the majesty of God, and gives a 
sublime conception when he says, " Jehovah sat 
as king at the flood." The prophet Isaiah intro- 
duces God as referring to the flood to emphasize 
the truth of His promise. The New Testament 
gives its full sanction to the historicity of the nar- 
rative. Our Lord clearly declares that the state 
of the world at His second coming will be like 
what it was in the days of Noah. The Apostle 
Peter draws from the flood lessons as to the long- 
suffering of God and the separation of the church 
from the world. He also makes it an instance of 
the righteous judgment of God, who spared' not 
the old world when it was corrupted by sin. Most 
beautiful is the closing scene after the judgment 
had been inflicted. Noah then built his altar, the 
first altar of which we read in the Bible, and then 
Jehovah smelled an "odor oi satisfaction" and 
promised that never again would he, for man's 
sake, curse the ground nor smite any living thing. 
Then the rainbow received its new meaning, and 
the special promises were given regarding seed- 
time and harvest, cold and heat, day and night. 
This is a peaceful, beautiful, and divine picture of 
leansed earth, spanned by the rainbow in the 
clouds after the fearful deluge had passed. 



WAS THE FLOOD UNIVERSAL OR LOCAL? 141 

Traditions of the Deluge. 

The literatures of many nations abound in 
legends of the flood, and between these and the 
Bible narrative marked resemblances are found. 
In various forms these traditions describe the pre- 
servation of one righteous man with his family. 
The Chaldsean traditions are nearest -to the He- 
brew records. The god Belus foretold a vast rain 
flood. The structure of a great ship is described ; 
a raven is sent out, and the ark itself is said to 
have been preserved on the high mountains. 
There are many other notices of the flood, such 
as those in the Phoenician mythology and in the 
Phrygian story of King Annakos. There is also 
a cycle of traditions in Eastern Asia, such as the 
Persian, Indian, and Chinese. These traditions, 
though varying in so many respects, all point to 
the truth of the Bible narrative. There is also 
the cycle of tradition found among the American 
nations, such as those of Mexico, those of the Ha- 
waiian Islands, and those of many Indian tribes. 
There are also legends of the flood preserved by 
the Fiji Islanders, by the Scandinavian Eddas, 
and also the account in the Koran; but the most 
interesting of all these myths are those of the 
Greek legends. They had two such myths — that 
of Ogyges and that of Deucalion and Pyrrha. 
This latter is the best known of the ethnic tradi- 
tions. It teaches us that the world had sunk into 
iniquity, and that mankind was doomed to de- 



1 4- OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES, 

Struction. The ocean and the clouds combined 
to drown the sinful race. The pious Deucalion, 
with his wife Pyrrha, floated in a chest, which 
bore them safely to the peaks of Parnassus. He, 
like Noah, sent out a dove, which returned the 
first time, but not the second. God gives in all 
these traditions confirmation of the truth of His 
holy Word. 

Lessons. 

This solemn and sublime event teaches us im- 
portant lessons. We see that God is able to exe- 
cute judgment against the greatest sinners. 
Though sinners join hand-in-hand they shall not 
escape God's righteous justice. Sinning angels 
cannot escape. God burned up the filthy Sodom- 
ites and drowned the sinful antediluvians. All 
the resoures of nature are at God's command. 
He wields the thunderbolt; and through heaven's 
open windows He poured the flood, and the vol- 
cano and the hurricane are obedient to His will. 

God gives ample warning to sinners and abun- 
dant opportunity for repentance. For one hun- 
dred and twenty years Xoah was a preacher of 
righteousness. His acts in building the ark, as 
well as his words in preaching the Gospel, were 
warnings to impenitent sinners. Doubtless he 
was often the subject of sneers and jeers. The 
>le may have considered him a good old man, 
but with strange fancies and amusing forebodings. 
They doubtless thought him lacking in sense, and 



WAS THE FLOOD UNIVERSAL OR LOCAL? 143 

perhaps wrong in his head; but he still kept on 
preaching. God's infinite holiness patiently 
waited. Wonderful was the long-suffering of 
God in the days of Noah. Well might the Apostle 
Peter dwell upon God's matchless patience; but 
the blow eventually fell. This terrible judgment 
manifested God's holiness, even as it was seen in 
Eden or on Sinai. 

There is safety for all true believers. God said 
to Noah, " Come thou and all thy house into the 
ark," and then God graciously closed the door and 
Noah was safe. The world without perished. 
God can save all His children, whatever destruc- 
tion may befall others. Sodom was destroyed, 
but Lot was saved. Jericho was destroyed, but 
Rahab w r as saved. Without, to-day, the flood of 
evil prevails. Christ is the true ark of safety. 
Come into Him, and you shall outride the storms 
of life, and land at last on the shining hills of 
glory, in the enjoyment of a new heaven and a 
new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. 



IX. 

WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF THE TOWER 
OF BABEL? 



IX. 

WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF THE 
TOWER OF BABEL? 

The account of the Tower of Babel is found in 
the eleventh chapter of Genesis and the first nine 
verses. Reference is made several times in the 
preceding chapter to the division of the race into 
various settlements ; the narrative now before us 
explains the divisions of the race and the diver- 
sities of the languages there assumed. This 
division and diversity resulted from the project of 
building the temple and tower of Babel, and of 
God's displeasure with the purpose of the people. 
In harmony with the method often employed by 
inspired writers, the dispersion of the people is 
first mentioned, and then the cause of that dis- 
persion is fully described. 

It is quite certain that the early fathers of the 
human family, after the deluge, wandered about 
for some time without any fixed place of abode ; 
but it was also quite certain that they could not 
always live a nomadic life. Gregariousness is an 
inseparable instinct of humanity; this tendency 
of human nature is shown to-day in the desire for 
city life. It thus comes to pass that the popula- 
tion of our great cities is increasing at the ex- 



14 s OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

pense of rural populations. This tendency is seen 
11 the countries of the globe. British and 
continental cities are growing almost as rapidly 
as are the most enterprising cities in America. 
In harmony with this ancient and universal in- 
stinct the descendants of Noah finally made a per- 
manent residence in the land of Shinar. Shinar 
was the ancient name of Babylonia or Chaldaea, 
as the tract of land in later times came to be 
known. This was a great alluvial district 
through which the Tigris and Euphrates flowed 
before reaching the sea. This country was 
marked by the absence of stone for building ma- 
terial, but it was famous for the excellence of the 
bricks there made, and for the slime that was 
used for mortar. It was known also for its textile 
fabrics; the " goodly Babylonish garment" of 
Joshua vii. 2 t , which proved a snare to Achan, was 
a " garment of Shinar. " This country is probably 
to be identified with the Sumer or the Shumer of 
the cuneiform inscriptions, and so a name denot- 
ing the southern portion of the ki land of the Chal- 
dajans." The name usually includes the whole 
rich and populous alluvial plain to which refer- 
ence has been made, reaching from the Persian 
Gulf to a point north of the modern Bagdad, a 
little more than two hundred miles. 



PURPOSE OF THE TOWER OF BABEL, 149 



"One Lip." 

Up to the time mentioned in the Scripture 
under consideration the people had remained to- 
gether, speaking one language. We are told that 
they were, to render the words literally, " of one 
lip and of words one" ; that is, they employed one 
kind or stock of words. They also developed one 
kind of civilization. As the lip is the principal 
organ in the utterance of words, the word sapliali, 
lip, is here employed, although a frequent Scrip- 
ture term for language is Icslion, tongue. The 
confusion of the lip is probably a change in the 
pronunciation of words, and this change will ac- 
count for the babel, or confusion, which took 
place at this time. The people finding a home in 
the rich plain of Shinar, the derivation suggesting 
its name as the land of "the two rivers," they de- 
termined to build a city and tower of great height. 
All ancient authorities and modern travellers 
affirm that building material was easy to find in 
this valley. The people, therefore, proceeded to 
burn bricks, " burning them to a burning," that is, 
burning them thoroughly, and to use slime or 
bitumen for mortar. Bricks were often dried 
simply by the sun, but these heroic builders 
wished to secure the most durable material, and 
so they thoroughly burned the bricks. The 
Scripture narrative teaches us that God interposed 
and frustrated all their plans, and this interposi- 



ISO OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

tion was brought about by the introduction of 
hopeless confusion into their lanugage. They 
were thus unable longer to understand one an- 
other. They therefore i% left off to build the city," 
and SOOI1 were scattered abroad oil the face of the 
earth. This remarkable circumstance gave rise 
to the word babel, perhaps meaning confusion. 
This name the Greeks corrupted into Babylon, 
and although originally applied only to the Tower 
of Babel, it was afterward extended to the city of 
Babylon, which grew up about the tow T er; and 
finally it was extended to the whole province of 
Babylonia. We thus see that God did not intend 
that men should always remain in a limited local- 
ity and should speak only one language. Per- 
haps the account here given will not explain fully 
the origin of languages; but it is at least sugges- 
tive of elements which entered into that origin, 
and into the conceptions of the times of the 
writer regarding the diversity of speech. Some 
would derive the word Babel from Bab-ilu^ mean- 
ing "the gate of the god." This is in substance 
the story as found on the inspired page. It is 
narrated in a dramatic manner and with rare 
poetic beauty. 

Ethnic Traditions. 

The Chaldavan traditions state that the first 
men became proud of their great strength and 
raised a tower reaching toward heaven in the 
place where Babylon afterward stood. They 



PURPOSE OF THE TOWER OF BABEL. 151 

state also that the gods, assisted by fierce winds, 
hurled the building down upon the heads of the 
builders, and that out of the material thus col- 
lected the city of Babylon was built. These tra- 
ditions harmonize with the Bible narrative in say- 
ing that before this event all the people spoke 
one language, but after it they differed widely in 
their tongues. Greek traditions are in substantial 
harmony with those of Chaldaea. Plato makes 
the uniformity extend to animals as well as to 
men in the golden age. Perhaps the advance of 
linguistic science will yet enable us to understand 
the language of animals, as these traditions affirm 
concerning the early period of human history. 
Plato also echoes other parts of the Bible story in 
saying that men in their unholy ambition aspired 
to immortality, and that they were punished by 
Jupiter, who utterly confounded their language. 
Attention has also been called to the fact that in 
the account of the wars of the Titans against the 
gods, we clearly see traces of the traditionary re- 
semblances to the narrative in the Bible concern- 
ing Babel. Other traditions associate these events 
with Nimrod, a "bold, bad man," who strove to 
alienate the minds of the people from God, and to 
build a tower too high for the waters ever to 
reach its top. This he did, the traditions affirm, 
in order to take revenge for the punishment of 
the deluge. But this explanation for the cause of 
the erection of Babel is very unsatisfactory. We 
know that the people could not have feared an- 



15 ^ OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

other deluge, for God had given an express prom- 
ise to the contrary; and if another deluge should 
come, they must have known that no tower they 
could build would protect them, as the waters 
went over the highest hills in the parts sub- 
merged. 

Several writers on this subject remind us that 
it was long believed that the native Babylonian 
records contained references to the tower of Babel 
and the confusion of speech ; and, it is stated, that 
recently such a record has been discovered. Mr. 
George Smith brought a number of clay tablets 
from Babylonia and deposited them in the British 
Museum, and among them is one, unfortunately 
badly mutilated, but still sufficiently legible to 
show that it probably contained the Babylonian 
account of this whole deeply interesting history. 
Herodotus, in simple and graphic language, de- 
scribes the building of the walls of Babylon in ex- 
pressions which remind us of the Biblical narra- 
tive of the building of the tower of Babel. In 
both narratives there is a reference to the excel- 
lent building materials which the Babylonian soil 
furnishes in such abundance. Bitumen pits are 
still found from which bitumen bubbles up, and 
which can be readily manufactured into cement 
for use in buildings at the present day. It is 
known that in some parts of southern California 
there is soil containing materials not unlike those 
found in the alluvial plain of Babylon. The 
tablets found in the British Museum state that the 



PURPOSE OF THE TOWER OF BABEL. 153 

tower was erected under the supervision of a semi- 
divine being called Etanna. In Central America 
there are traditions similar to the story of the 
tower of Babel. Xelhua, one of the seven giants 
rescued from the deluge, so the tradition affirms, 
attempted to storm heaven and oppose all the 
gods, and so he built the great pyramid of Cholula. 
But in this case also the gods interposed, destroyed 
the tower with fire, and utterly confounded the 
lanofuaofe of the builders. In northern India 
traces of similar legends are found; and even 
among certain African tribes Dr. Livingstone met 
with traditions possessing features similar to the 
narrative in the Bible. There are also Australian 
legends regarding the origin of the diversity of 
speech kindred to those already named. All 
these traditions point to an original historic inci- 
dent ; they tend to confirm our faith in the Bible 
narrative. They are all eloquent as to the orig- 
inal unity of the race and the reality of the divine 
purpose in its dispersion. 

Reasons for Building the Tower. 

It is clearly shown in the sacred narrative that 
the design of the builders was threefold. They 
wished to make a name ; this is distinctly stated 
in Genesis xi. 4. A tower is simply another name 
for a citadel, or place of defence. This reason 
for the building of the tower sets aside a great 
many foolish conjectures as to its design. The 



154 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

primary object was to transmit an illustrious 

name for grand designs and heroic enterprises. 
The project had reference to some warlike move- 
ments which would enable the people to defend 
themselves against insurrections, and probably to 
m unholy despotism. Nimrod was prob- 
ably the leader, and he was one of the first who is 
recorded to have attempted the exercise of des- 
potic power over his fellow-men. A second 
reason was an ambition to erect a structure which 
in itself should challenge attention and evoke 
admiration. A third reason is that the people 
might not be scattered abroad. The Bible gives 
no intimation whatever that the tower was built 
for the purpose of escaping another flood. The 
great height of the tower would make it a rallying 
point in the level plains where it was located. In 
these wide and level plains this was an object of 
great practical importance, as there are few ob- 
jects to guide the traveller in his journeys, the 
plains being virtually a vast sea of land. In the 
simple fact that the people did not wish to be 
scattered abroad they were opposing God's pur- 
pose as several times declared. It is quite cer- 
tain that some unworthy motives and ungodly 
ambitions were blended with the desire of the 
people to remain together. There is much in this 
desire which elicits our commendation, but we 
must see that the conduct of the people evinced 

. arrogance, and disobedience against God. 

• were forcing a conspiracy to establish a uni- 



PURPOSE OF THE TOWER OF BABEL. 155 

versal temporal monarchy. God intended that 
the people should spread themselves abroad, and 
they attempted to defeat the purpose of God in 
this regard. They resolved to establish a civiliza- 
tion of their own ; they planned to build society, 
not upon faith in an unseen God, but on lofty 
brick walls and sky-kissing towers. Thy were 
believers in a merely material civilization. Their 
work was an offspring of an unholy ambition. 
Philo narrates a tradition that each man wrote 
his name on a brick which was to be placed in the 
structure. The same tendency is seen to-day. 
Men strive to shut out God from personal, family, 
and national life. They talk simply of law, of 
culture, and of civilization, ignoring God and 
spiritual and eternal things. God will in some 
form confound their plans as surely as He did 
those of the builders on the plains of Shinar. God 
can overrule and frustrate the ambitious dreams 
of the Nimrods, the Nebuchadnezzars, the Alex- 
anders, the Caesars, and the Napoleons of all cen- 
turies, countries, and civilizations. 

The Original Language. 

We do not know what the original language 
was which was confounded at Babel. For a long 
time it was claimed that it was the Hebrew, but 
that idea has now been largely abandoned. 
Learned men have not yet reached any satisfac- 
tory conclusion regarding the original tongue. 



i 5° OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

Some suppose that it is entirely lost. It may 
have been the Hebrew or the Aramaic. We know 
that the Aramaic was long dominant in the valley 
o\ the Euphrates, and that it is closely allied to 
the Hebrew; these two facts make a strong plea 
in favor of the Aramaic, or Chaldee, as the very 
language of Noah, or at least as belonging to the 
same family of languages as that which he spoke. 
Enthusiastic Highland Scotchmen are firmly con- 
vinced that the language of Adam and Noah was 
none other than the Gaelic, and some of the argu- 
ments which they use in the attempt to establish 
this point are, to say the least, most suggestive 
and striking. This, however, is a point regarding 
which scholarship has not yet reached any defi- 
nite conclusion. The science of comparative phi- 
lology has in recent years made tremendous prog- 
ress. It has enabled us to determine the relations 
between the Saxon and the Norman, and between 
the conquering Aryans in India and the many 
conquered tribes in that great peninsula, and it 
may yet enable us to determine with some degree 
of certainty the language which was spoken before 
the confusion of tongues and the dispersion of the 
peoples occurred. God will eventually use the 
scholarship of the world for the glory of the Bible, 
the salvation of men, and the honor of Jesus 
Christ. 



PURPOSE OF THE TOWER OF BABEL. 157 



The Modern Representative of Babel. 

This historic tower is mentioned only once in 
Scripture, in the passage now under review. Was 
it ever completed? All the indications confirm 
us in believing that it was not; perhaps it never 
advanced much beyond its foundations. The 
Jewish tradition is that fire fell from Heaven and 
split the tower into fragments. It is believed, 
however, that the " Tower of Belus" occupies the 
site of the original tower of Babel. Classical 
writers, in describing Babylon, uniformly refer to 
a tower-like building which they call " The Tem- 
ple or Tomb of Belus." This structure is de- 
scribed by Herodotus, and is probably represent- 
ed by the modern " Birs-Nimrud " ; some writers 
in this connection speak of what was called " The 
Temple of the Seven Lights of the Earth," dedi- 
cated to Nebo at Borsippa, a suburb of Babylon. 
This structure was completed in the reign of Ne- 
buchadnezzar. When he conquered Jerusalem he 
put its captured treasures in the temple of Bel at 
Babylon. When the Jews were carried captive 
into Babylonia they saw in many of the great 
buildings reminders of the tower mentioned in 
their Scriptures. Christian travellers were accus- 
tomed to call any great mass of ruins " The Tower 
of Babel." There was long a consensus of opin- 
ion among the learned that Birs-Nimrud, or Tow- 
er of Nimrod, was the tower of Babel ; and it is 



IS 8 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

now pretty generally agreed that it at least is a 
good representative of an ancient Babylonian 
temple-tower. Dr. William Hayes Ward, of New 
York, as the head of the Wolfe expedition, had 
it photographed by Mr. J. H. Haynes, and Dr. 
Ward has fully described this historic ruin. He 
is disposed to regard the story in Genesis as an 
interesting illustration of folklore; but his de- 
scription and illustrations tend to confirm the 
truth of the story. The building is an oblique 
pyramid. Its first basement stage is an exact 
square 272 feet each way, 26 feet high; the second 
is 230 feet each way, and the third 188 feet. It 
thus decreases in width as it increases in height. 
It has been recently conjectured that the upper 
portions of this tower were used as an observa- 
tory for astronomical observations. It is well 
known that the Babylonians were earnest stu- 
dents of astronomy, and the elevation of this 
tower, the clear atmosphere, and the broad plains 
were all conducive to the careful study of this en- 
nobling science. It has also been suggested that 
the upper portions of this tower were used by the 
priests as sleeping-places in the summer-time, as 
they gave greater coolness and greater freedom 
from insects than the lower stories furnished. 
All travellers agree that this mass of ruins is 
deeply impressive as it rises out of the desert 
plain. Parts of it show the effect of great heat, 
as they are vitrified. It is a fire-blasted pile and 
is rent and fragmentary. Its dreary aspect has 



PURPOSE OF THE TOWER OF BABEL. 159 

led to its being called " Nebuchadnezzar's Prison. " 
The entire neighborhood indicates that here 
there was some signal overthrow in former times. 
Perhaps the vitrification is a justification of the 
tradition that the tower was blasted b) r the light- 
nings of Heaven. The pyramidal temples of other 
countries make belief in this great tower of Belus 
less difficult. All who have visited Tanjore, in 
India, are familiar with a tower which will at 
least suggest that of Babel — the Tower at Tan- 
jore. It is built entirely of stone, and on its top 
is a chapel or temple whose design is in harmony 
with that of other sacred structures in India. 
The gate of these pagodas always fronts the 
east; they are generally on the banks of great 
rivers, and are usually surrounded by courts. 
The great Mexican pyramid is not much unlike 
that of Tanjore. These pyramids show the ten- 
dency of former days in different parts of the 
world and among various peoples. 

God's Purpose in the Dispersion of Races. 

It was the purpose of God that the three primi- 
tive families should migrate. From the central 
regions, where they developed their first civiliza- 
tions, they went out by successive colonizations, 
and soon they established distant communities. 
Marvellously interesting is it to trace God's hand 
in the boundaries and characteristics of various 
nations. The Hamitic, the Semitic, and the Ja- 



160 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

photic had each its work to do, and its triumphs 
to achieve. The sons of Japheth were men of 
resistless will and tireless muscle. Westward and 
northward they pushed, and finally they became 
the authors of Greek literature, of Roman gov- 
ernment, of modern Europe, and of marvellous 
America. This commingling of races is God's 
plan for saving man physically. No unmixed 
race can long hold its own. The native Hawai- 
ians must speedily die or unite with seme other 
races. The modern Frenchman has in his veins 
the blood of the Celt, the Frank, and the Nor- 
man, and he is better than either one alone. 
In the veins of the modern Briton are the com- 
mingling streams of the blood of many nations; 
and the modern Briton is marching to the ends 
of the earth, carrying with him law, liberty, civil- 
ization, and Christianity. The American of the 
future will be an amalgam of many nations; and 
he ought to be the noblest product of civilization 
and Christianity which the world has yet seen. 
America deserves the best from all the nations of 
the earth. The worst nations of southern Europe 
should no longer be permitted to dump their ref- 
use populations on our American shores. 

Lessons. 

There is great danger that we may still mani- 
fest the spirit of the builders of Babel. Men are 
still under the power of unholy ambitions and 



PURPOSE OF THE TOWER OF BABEL. 161 

material civilizations. God should be the guide 
of every life. God should be the senior partner 
of every business. It is daring impiety which 
leaves God out of our plans for life. 

The church of Jesus Christ had its natal day 
on the day of Pentecost, and Pentecost is the 
counterpart of Babel. Pentecost made it possible 
for the messengers of the cross to go to the ends 
of the earth with the message of the Gospel of 
salvation. Babel made men in some sense aliens ; 
Pentecost aims to make all men brothers. In the 
Fatherhood of God we have the true brotherhood 
of man. The church calls us to labor as builders 
of the true city of God. Its living stones are ce- 
mented together by the unity of the faith. The 
city we are building has enduring foundations, 
and its top will finally reach to Heaven. In 
Heaven there is one language, one life, one love. 
God hasten the blessed consummation when the 
kingdoms of this world shall become the kingdom 

of our Lord and His Christ! 
ii 



X. 

WAS LOT WISE IN PITCHING HIS TENT 
TOWARD SODOM? 



X. 

WAS LOT WISE IN PITCHING HIS TENT 
TOWARD SODOM? 

In Genesis, the thirteenth chapter and a part of 
the twelfth verse, we read concerning Lot that 
he " pitched his tent toward Sodom. ' ' Did he act 
wisely in so doing? The story suggested by these 
words is full of interest and instruction. It opens 
with associative glimpses into family life of the 
ancient time. 

We here see how r in private life there are op- 
portunities of displaying a rare heroism and a fine 
chivalry. We shall observe in studying this nar- 
rative that common events may reveal selfishness 
or generosit} r of character, and may be made an 
occasion for developing the noblest qualities of 
manhood and the broadest principles of godliness. 
This ancient story shows us how true religion 
beautifies and glorifies domestic life, and how the 
lowliest duties may manifest the loftiest qualities 
in human action. 

Lot's Name and Family. 

His name means a covering or a veil. He was 
the son of Haran, and so the nephew of Abram. 
His grandfather was Terah. About two thousand 



l66 OLD TEST AM EXT DIFFICULTIES. 

years before Christ he removed with his grand- 
father to Haran in Mesopotamia. There Terah 
died aged two hundred and five years. About a 
year later, in company with Abraham, Lot came 
into the land of Canaan. In consequence of a 
famine, he went with Abram and Sarai into 
Egypt; soon after he returned to the southern 
part of Canaan, and then went to the region of 
Bethel and Ai, where Abram built his first altar 
and called upon the name of Jehovah. We shall 
get a true conception of Lot's character and his- 
tory by a series of pictures representing both, at 
which we may now look. 

First Picture. 

We have before us Lot making a selfish choice 
of the best pastures. This is a most instructive 
picture. In the background are seen the herds- 
men of Lot engaged in strife with the herdsmen 
of Abram. Still farther in the background are 
seen the Canaanite and the Perizzite who still 
dwelled in the land; and in the foreground are 
Been the noble Abram and the selfish Lot. The 
presence of the heathen in the land ought to have 
warned the herdsmen of the danger of their family 
quarrels. But the spirit of rivalry and jealousy 
broke forth, notwithstanding the danger to which 
it subjected both Abram and Lot. They went 
down into Egypt poor, and they now return rich. 
The Hebrew words translated " very rich" literal- 



WAS LOT WISE? 167 

ly mean exceedingly heavy. The term rich is, of 
course, a relative one, and judged by British or 
American standards a wealth y Arab sheik would 
be considered poor. The wealth of these emirs 
consisted mostly in flocks of sheep and goats, and 
in camels. Their increased flocks made herbage in 
the vicinity of Bethel too scanty for their accom- 
modation. Behold the two men standing on one 
of the round swelling hills near Bethel ! So far 
as we can discover, there is no strife between 
them ; it is limited to their herdsmen. But Abram 
was sagacious enough to foresee that these jar- 
ring jealousies would increase more and more, 
and might finally cause an estrangement between 
him and his nephew. These two men stand look- 
ing out over the empty land in the direction of 
Sodom. The land before them is beautiful to the 
eye ; it is well watered — literally it was " all a- wa- 
tering " — showing the fertilizing effect which 
irrigation by various streams produced. 

The language of the Scripture at this point is 
very striking. The land is as beautiful as the 
wonderfully green Egypt which they had just 
left, and beautiful even as the garden of Jeho- 
rah, whose superhuman charms still lingered in 
the thought of the time. Abram gave Lot his 
choice. Through the clear air of Palestine the 
distant valley could clearly be seen. It has 
been well remarked that we are here reminded 
of the choice of Hercules, as described in Gre- 
cian legend, and of the turning back of the 



i6S OLD TESTA MR XT DIFFICULTIES. 

prophet from Damascus as represented in the 
tables of Islam. Ahram here treats Lot as if 
they were really brethren, instead of uncle and 
nephew. The prospect was fascinating in the 
extreme, and Lot could not resist its attractions. 
He chose all the plain of Jordan; he journeyed 
east, he pitched his tent toward Sodom, and he 
separated from his noble uncle. The conduct of 
Abram was eminently considerate; it was gener- 
ous almost to a fault. Not only was he the se- 
nior and superior of the two, but he was especially 
called of God to lordship in the land. The con- 
duct of Lot was selfish and covetous to a remark- 
able degree. His finer feelings Avere deadened, 
and he assumed enormous risk in going toward 
Sodom, because of its well-known character for 
the practice of abominable evils. 

This picture makes a powerful appeal to the 
imagination. We shall later see that Lot paid an 
enormous price for his rich pastures. We ought 
always to remember, when we yield to the gratifi- 
cation of the moment, that there is a to-mor- 
row with which we must reckon. The people of 
Sodom were not only wicked, but desperately 
wicked; they were high-handed and heaven-dar- 
ing sinners. Vet Lot chose their neighborhood 
for the sake of its temporal advantage. It may 
be that the word translated toward means at, or 
in the vicinity of, Sodom; but it is not quite in 
Sodom. Choices reveal character. A man is 
really what his choice declares his inner life to 



WAS LOT WISE? 169 

be. The man who prefers pebbles to diamonds 
manifests insanity. The man who chooses a tem- 
porary earthly good and rejects eternal and spir- 
itual things is morally insane. So Lot chose. He 
removed his tent from place to place, but grad- 
ually he approaches Sodom. Perhaps he intended 
to keep at some distance from this perilous place ; 
but still he goes imperceptibly onward. He nears 
this sink of corruption. He treads the borders 
of forbidden ground. 

So men trifle to-day with evil ; so they parley 
with the devil. They lie on the bank of the nar- 
row stream dividing right from wrong. They do 
not intend to cross that stream ; but they love to 
look upon the blooming flowers and to breathe 
the pleasant odors of the forbidden land. Things 
inevitably follow their tendencies. If these men 
do not quickly change their course both they and 
Lot will be in Sodom. " Let him that thinketh 
he standeth take heed lest he fall." 

Second Picture. 

We next find Lot, together with the inhabitants 
of Sodom, made a prisoner by Chedorlaomer. 
Let us quickly get the salient features of this 
picture. Chedorlaomer came from beyond the 
Euphrates; he was king of Elam, in Persia. He 
was the leader of the several allied kings, who 
invaded Canaan. He had already brought a 
number of small states under tribute, and among 



i 7° OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

these were the five cities in the region of the 
Dead Sea. These states were impatient tinder 

their burden of tribute, and finally they withheld 
its payment. This led to the invasion of the 
country, and to the ravaging visitation of the 
whole country south and east of the Jordan. 
Soon the kings of the plains were defeated and 
carried away as slaves, as was the custom of the 
times. Lot was included in this unfortunate num- 
ber of slaves. He had cast in his lot with these 
people, and he must share with them in their evil 
fortune. This is part of the price which he is 
paying for his good pastures. Behold him now 
borne off, a slave in the power of his cruel cap- 
tors! 

Nobly does the character of generous Abram 
appear in this crisis in the life of Lot. Abram 
heard of his misfortune and hastened to his 
rescue. The brave uncle immediately armed 
three hundred and eighteen of his retainers — a 
fact that shows he was a sheik of wealth and 
power — and joined by three friendly Amoritish 
chiefs, he pursued the returning invaders. Near 
the fountains of the Jordan he overtook them as 
they fled in haste. Some of his allies attacked 
the enemies by night on the one side, and some 
on the other; and soon they were thrown into 
utter confusion and fled in hopeless dismay. On, 
on over the hills went the brave Abram and his 
heroic men in hot pursuit until they reached the 
'iborhoodof Damascus. They then returned 



WAS LOT WISE? 171 

victorious, carrying back the men and the proper- 
ty seized by the invaders. Doubtless Lot's sad 
plight influenced Abram to undertake this ex- 
ploit ; but in delivering Lot he conferred signal 
benefits on many tribes and peoples ; and, as a 
result, his courage and wisdom were greatly 
honored throughout the land. It was while on 
his return from this successful expedition that 
he was met by Melchizedek, king of Salem, and 
priest of the most high God. * 

Abrani might have kept, according to the usa- 
ges of war, then and there, and in many parts of 
the Orient still, the recovered goods; and the 
king of Sodom, who met the victors in the val- 
ley near Salem, freely admitted this right. But 
Abram, with a truly noble spirit toward men and 
a loyal devotion toward God, refused the goods, 
saying: " I have lifted up mine hand unto Jeho- 
vah, the most high God, and I will not take from 
a thread to a sandal-thong, lest thou shouldst 
say, I have made Abram rich." These are stir- 
ring words ; they thrill our hearts to this hour. 
These heroic achievements and generous senti- 
ments gave Abram much deserved celebrity in 
Canaan. The people owed their deliverance to 
Abram, and even Lot, for his uncle's sake, must 
have received some respect and gratitude. But 
the Sodomites were so besotted, corrupt, and 
bestial as to have few sentiments of gratitude or 
generosity above the level of their degraded in- 
stincts and sensualized desires. 



172 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

Third Picture. 

We now find Lot actually living in vSodom. He 
is now married, and probably he found his wife 
in Sodom. That was a bad place in which to find 
a wife. Better never be married than marry in 
m ! Were there no other women whom he 
could have chosen? Had his own tastes already 
become degraded? Nothing more surely suggests 
a man's measure, intellectual and spiritual, than 
the wife he chooses. Marriage should be the out- 
come of the deepest choice and the noblest ambi- 
tion ; it should be the wisest act of life, and the 
fullest proof of divine guidance. Think of marry- 
ing a woman in Sodom! This name through all 
the ages has been the symbol of all that is vilest 
in human relations. Abram's nephew married to 
a woman of Sodom ! Soon there are in his house- 
hold sons and daughters marriageable and mar- 
ried. One would have thought that he would 
have had more sense, a nobler ambition, and a 
truer piety than so to marry. He is now a well- 
known resident of the town; he is a leader in its 
affairs. All these sad results have come from 
pitching his tent toward Sodom. His family later 
showed the degrading influences of the social at- 
mosphere in which they lived. Lot is paying a 
terribly high price for his good pastures. Men 
make a fearful mistake when for the sake of busi- 
prosperity they knowingly form partnerships 
with bad men, and willingly subject themselves to 



WAS LOT WISE? 173 

moral dangers in their choice of a residence. No 
man has a right to assume these terrible risks. 
God help us to avoid even the appearance of evil ! 

Fourth Picture. 

Behold Lot a judge in Sodom. This is the 
rabbinical tradition, and there are hints in 
Scripture looking in this direction. In Genesis 
xix. 1 we read of Lot as sitting in the gate of So- 
dom. He had thus thoroughly identified himself 
with the city and its people. In ancient times 
and cities the gates were the chief places of re- 
sort. There social intercourse took place, there 
pleasant recreations were enjoyed, there the mar- 
kets were held, there public affairs were discussed, 
and there courts of justice held their sessions. 
All these things brought great concourses of peo- 
ple to the gate. Modern Arabs and other Orien- 
tal people still flock to the gates of the towns and 
cities; there the news of the day is heard, and all 
forms of social life are enjoyed. The Jewish 
commentators, as already suggested, understand 
the reference to Lot's sitting at the gate as im- 
plying that he exercised the authority of a mag- 
istrate. The elders of the cities in those early 
days readily became the acknowledged judges in 
civil affairs. Lot was now a comparatively old 
man ; he was a resident of long standing in 
Sodom. He was acknowledged to be a leader in 
business and in social life; his business interests 
and his social relations are in Sodom. Mrs. Lot, 



174 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

it is fair to assume, was also a recognized social 
leader in the best or worst circles of society in 
Sodom. The young ladies of the family were 
My the belles of the town. It is an awful 
thing for a man to begin by pitching- his tent 
toward Sodom; there are ten chances to one that 
he will end by landing in Sodom. It is an un- 
speakably foolish thing to put one's head into the 
lion's mouth. One day the lion will close his 
mouth, and there will be a headless man at the 
menagerie or circus. Often the best way to over- 
come temptation is to avoid temptation. It is 
mockery of God to pray, " Lead us not into temp- 
tation," and then recklessly run into temptation. 
God help us to avoid pitching our tent toward 
Sodom ! 

Fifth Picture. 

Behold Lot thoroughly humiliated while enter- 
taining heavenly visitors. He still preserves in 
the midst of the licentious corruptions of Sodom 
some of the nobler qualities of a generous hospi- 
tality. Behold him inviting those heavenly visi- 
tors to turn in and tarry all night in his house. 
We see the water brought for the dusty feet of 
the tired travellers; we sec bread offered them for 
their hunger; we witness all the rites of a chival- 
rous hospitality, even as these mysterious way- 
farers had enjoyed the hospitality of Abram that 
very morning on the heights of Hebron. The 
author of the Epistle to the Hebrews does not fail 



WAS LOT WISE? 175 

to mention with commendation this charming 
trait. The Apostle Peter tells us that Lot's 
righteous soul was vexed, wearied, burdened, 
from day to day by the filthy conversation and 
unlawful deeds of his fellow-townsmen. God did 
indeed keep him from the grosser contaminations 
of his neighbors ; for the Lord knoweth how to 
deliver the godly out of temptation. Lot was in 
some sense a just man in the midst of a mob of 
lawless, sensual, and utterly abominable neigh- 
bors. 

But a greater trial than ever before is now in 
store for him. We have seen him extending the 
hospitality of his tent to his heavenly visitants. 
They are the avenging angels sent to destroy 
guilty Sodom. The news of their arrival is 
noised about the town ; the brutal men of Sodom 
surround the house of Lot and make a demand 
for the strangers. Their purpose has made the 
name of Sodom a synonym for infamy throughout 
all the ages. The demand is resisted; the house 
is attacked; and then the angels, thus having a 
fearful illustration of the wickedness which they 
came to punish, struck the worse than beastly 
men with blindness. The Hebrew word trans- 
lated blindness is bassanverim ; this word liter- 
ally means with " dazzled blindnesses." We have 
the original word only here and in 2 Kings vi. 
18, where a similar effect was produced on the 
Syrian army in answer to Elisha's prayer. In 
both cases a confused vision, such as is caused by 



lj6 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

vertigo of the brain, resulted. Still these satanic 
Sodomites madly persisted in their abominable 
purpose. Think of bringing up a family in such 
a social atmosphere! Truly Lot was paying a 
high price for his good pastures. Truly the 
Sodomites were ripe for the judgment which was 
about to fall upon them from God. Little did 
they think that vengeance was so near. Men are 
still fascinated by evil; they are still blind to the 
coming of God's judgments. Lot is now told that 
Sodom will be destroyed, and he is urged to flee 
with his family from the doomed place. 

Sixth Picture. 

Behold Lot in the midst of all the horrors 

attending the destruction of Sodom. This is a 

tearful picture; it is impossible to paint its colors 

too vividly. The angels promised deliverance to 

Lot's daughters who had married in Sodom, but 

they scorned the offer of mercy. Hastened by 

the angels. Lot, his wife, and two unmarried 

daughters, start for a place of safety. His wife 

ered, looked lovingly backward, and was soon 

with an incrustation from the saline 

him and his daughters hastening to 

This was the smallest of the cities of the 

; and to afford him a place of relief it had 

red. In a cavern in the mountains he and 

they or some time. Well had it been for 

him if he had remained with Abram. All his 

property is gone, several of his family are gone, 



WAS LOT WISE? 177 

his wife is gone, and soon his honor and that of 
his daughters will go. Terrible is the price 
which Lot paid for his good pastures ! 

Seventh Picture. 

One wishes to draw a veil over this picture and 
forever to hide the later scenes of Lot's life. 
Only the barest outlines of this picture can be 
given. Already the taint of Sodom is manifested 
in Lot's daughters. They are dishonored, and 
he is unconsciously degraded. Thus sprang the 
Moabites and the Ammonites. Many attempts at 
excusing this transaction have been made; but 
apology for it is impossible. Charity covers it 
with a mantle. 

Lot's preservation is alluded to by our Lord, 
and his character is honored in certain respects 
by the Apostle Peter. The Mohammedan tradi- 
tions affirm that he went to Sodom as a preacher 
of righteousness. They still point out his grave 
east of Hebron. The names of Lot and Sodom 
are still associated with the sins which are said to 
be still the most common in Eastern cities. 

Lessons. 

We see the terrible depravity of which human 

nature is capable. The phrase "total depravity" 

is not found in the Bible, but it sometimes seems 

as if the thing itself is found in certain circles of 

human life. It is often a slander on animals to 

call some men brutes. God alone can fully see 
12 



I 7 8 OLD TES TA MENT DIFFICUL TIES. 

the terrible depths of sin to which human souls may 
fall. There is constant need that we watch and 
pray that we do not ourselves fall. Sinners are 
often most reckless when their hour of doom is 
nearest. The men of Sodom showed their great 
wickedness in the presence of God's avenging 
angels. Men little know now how near the cloud 
of wrath may be whose thtinderbolts the prayers 
of some saints are warding off from their hearts. 

We see that God can preserve His saints from 
the worst forms of contaminations even in fear- 
fully sinful environments; but men ought not 
needlessly to expose themselves to danger. What 
right has a reformed man to go into saloons? 
The tinkle of glasses and the odors of liquors may 
set his appetite aflame as with the fires of hell. 
It is a most dangerous thing for some persons to 
go " slumming. " A noble physician will not hesi- 
tate to go to a home whose atmosphere is laden 
with malaria. A true minister, in like manner, 
will go where the germs of moral malaria fill the 
air; but even he ought to be very sure that it is 
God who calls for the visit, and that God calls 
him, and not some one else, to make the visit. Let 
us all remember, not only Lot's wife, but Lot's 
selfish choice and fearful fate. God help us to 
avoid the very appearance of evil, and to turn 
our face and direct our steps evermore toward 
truth, purity, Christ, and Heaven! 



XI. 

WHO WAS MELCHIZEDEK, THE MYSTERIOUS 
KING-PRIEST ? 



XI. 



WHO WAS MELCHIZEDEK, THE MYS- 
TERIOUS KING-PRIEST ? 

The first account of this remarkable personage 
is found in Genesis xiv. 18-20. Around but few 
characters of history, sacred or profane, is there 
so great a cloud of mystery as around this king- 
priest ; and regarding no man whose history is 
recorded in the Bible has fancy played so large a 
part. This result is due in great measure to the 
sudden manner in which he first appears on, and 
departs from, the page of Bible history. His per- 
sonality falls upon the sacred narrative as a ray of 
light from the noonday sky ; this old king-priest, 
like the flash of a meteor, crosses the path of the 
conquering patriarch. Thus he emerges from the 
gloom of historic darkness, and he almost imme- 
diately disappears into the darkness whence he 
had emerged, and then into an historic seclusion 
wellnigh inscrutable. Yet during his brief ap- 
pearance, he was treated by Abram with so much 
respect that the mystery of his personality is 
greatly deepened. Nearly a thousand years pass, 
and he once more appears upon the historic 
pages, in the words of the Psalmist ; then for a 



152 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

thousand years more there is complete silence 
concerning him, and his name finally appears, 
surrounded with deeper apparent mystery, in the 
fifth, sixth, and seventh chapters of the Epistle 
to the Hebrews. We there learn that his parent- 
age was unknown, his genealogy unrecorded, 
and the beginning and ending of his priestly office 
unchronicled. It is not surprising that in this 
ancient and enigmatical personage many saw a 
divinely appointed type of Jesus Christ as the 
great High-Priest and eternal King. For hun- 
dreds, perhaps thousands, of years this unique be- 
ing has been the subject of earnest discussion. It 
is almost unpardonable temerity to undertake to 
answer the question asked in the title of this dis- 
course. We may, however, devoutly study the 
passages of Scripture in which his name occurs ; 
and we may firmly hold the conclusion forced 
upon us, when these Scriptures are interpreted 
without prejudice, and with all the lucidity which 
the Holy vSpirit may give as the reward of their 
reverent study. 

His Name and Office. 

Profoundly suggestive is the name of Melchi- 
zedek, " King of Righteousness. " The name in- 
dicates that the Canaanitish language was prob- 
ably Semitic. This title seems to be personal, 
rather than official, like the words Pharaoh and 
Augustus. He is also called " King of Salem" — 



WHO WAS MELCHIZEDEK? 183 

the king of peace. Regarding the location of 
Salem we shall have occasion later to speak ; the 
name, however, is beautifully suggestive in con- 
nection with this mysterious king-priest. We are 
also told that he was " the priest of the most high 
God." It is a deeply interesting fact that the 
word colioi, priest, occurs here for the first time 
in the Bible, and it is observable that it is found in 
connection with the worship of an ancient people 
outside the chosen people of God. There will 
always be doubt regarding the etymological 
meaning of the word. Usually the priesthood of 
the patriarchs was simply that of the head of the 
family; but here we have a priest performing 
solemn priestly acts not limited by the family 
relation. The appearance of this title indicates 
the existence of a constituted worship not belong- 
ing to what was afterward known as the Mosaic 
cultus. Perhaps, indeed, the Mosaic ritual was 
a fuller development of a system of worship which 
existed from the beginning. Significant also is 
the name here given to God, " the Most High 
God" — literally, El Elion. This name for the su- 
preme Deity occurs only here ; the word El signi- 
fies the strong One, and is usually applied to God 
in connection with some qualifying attribute. It 
recognizes God as the exalted and the supreme 
One. Probably under this name Melchizedek 
worshipped the true God. 



184 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

Various Opinions. 

In all periods, alike of Jewish and Christian 
history, the personality of Melchizedek has been 
invested with peculiar awe. Some Jewish tradi- 
tions declare that he was a survivor of the deluge, 
and was possibly the patriarch Shem. If he were 
this patriarch, his great age, his wide experience, 
his relation to Noah, and his approval by God 
would all tend to advance his dignity, and to 
make his authority wellnigh supreme. He could 
readily be conceived of as virtually the undis- 
puted lord of the whole land, and as entitled 
to convey the possessions under his control to 
Abram, who received his benediction. Jerome 
devotes much space to the discussion of the per- 
son, position, and territorial dominion of Melchi- 
zedek, and he states that it was the prevailing 
opinion in his day, among the Jews, that Melchi- 
zedek was the patriarch Shem. Some authorities 
ascribe this opinion also to the Samaritans who, 
although opposed bitterly to the Jews in many 
things, agreed with them in making Melchizedek 
none other than Shem. The article on Melchize- 
dek in Smith's Bible Dictionary states that this 
opinion was embraced by Luther, Melanchthon, 
Broughton, Selden, Lightfoot, Jackson, and many 
others. This writer further reminds us, that Ori- 
gen and others believed that Melchizedek was an 
angel ; it is thus easy for US to see how great rever- 
ence would be paid by Jews and Christians alike 



WHO WAS MELCHIZEDEK? 185 

to such a character as Melchizedek. But a care- 
ful examination of the passages of Scripture in 
which his name appears will show that there is 
no good reason for believing that he was either 
the patriarch Shem or an angel from Heaven. 
Others have thought that he was the incarnation 
of some power, virtue, or influence of God; but 
this idea was sharply opposed by other Christian 
teachers honored for great learning and devout 
piety. The bold conjecture has been made that 
he was the Holy Ghost. Still others have af- 
firmed that he was the Son of God appearing in 
human form. The great Ambrose seems to have 
adopted this view, and it has found favor among 
many modern teachers. A former member of the 
Calvary Church, and a very learned man in many 
languages, philosophies, and religions, tenaciously 
held this view. It was always interesting and in- 
structive to hear his reasoning on this subject, 
and to observe the reverent enthusiasm with 
which he traced the stately steppings of the 
Christ in that mysterious land and ancient his- 
tory. Akin to this Christian idea is that of some 
Jews that Melchizedek was the Messiah. We all 
believe that Christ appeared occasionally in tem- 
porary incarnations before he became the Son of 
Man in Bethlehem's manger. That he appeared 
to Abraham, to Jacob, to Moses, to Joshua, and 
to Gideon, there can be but little doubt. If we 
refuse to believe that Melchizedek was a true 
man, nothing could be more natural than to sup- 



iS6 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

pose that he was the Christ. The language of the 
writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, some have 
thought, favors that idea. Melchizedek is there 
spoken of as without father or mother, and with- 
out beginning of life or end of days. We shall, 
a little later, see that there is a much simpler, 
more natural, and more literal interpretation of 
that language, which frees it from giving its 
authority to the idea that Melchizedek was the 
Messiah. There have been still other opinions as 
to his identity, such as that he was a descendant 
of Ham, or Japhet, or Enoch; but it is needless 
to multiply these unwarranted and unscriptural 
guesses, and some of them are not only unscrip- 
tural but contrascriptural. 

The Teaching of Scripture. 

Many of our difficulties in interpreting Scrip- 
ture are not really in the Scripture itself, but in 
men's unwarranted additions to Scripture. It is 
often far harder to understand some human com- 
ments on the Scriptures than it is to comprehend 
the teachings which these comments were in- 
tended to elucidate. It is often much more diffi- 
cult to interpret some so-called Christian creeds 
than it is to understand the Scripture on which 
they are supposed to be based. He was not an 
Ignorant man who said, while reading Bunyan's 
pim's Progress," that he got on very well with 
the large print, but he often found it impossible 
to understand the notes at the bottom of the page. 



WHO WAS MELCHIZEDEK? 187 

We often need to read Scripture afresh ; to read 
it as if the Bible were a book just issued from the 
press ; to read it with the interest which attaches 
to Dr. Nansen's recent volumes, or to the life of 
Lord Tennyson. If we were in this way to read 
the passages bearing on baptism, there would be 
no further controversy in the churches on that 
subject. The Bible cannot make its teachings 
clearer, both as to the subject and the act of bap- 
tism. If Christ and the apostles had intended to 
teach that believers are the only subjects of bap- 
tism and immersion is the act in baptism, they 
would have used the very language which they 
have employed. The Greek is the most accurate 
and philosophical of all languages. It has a word 
meaning to sprinkle and one meaning to pour, 
but neither is ever employed regarding baptism, 
but always the word meaning to immerse. But 
many men read the commands regarding bap- 
tism, not to get out God's thought, but to put in 
their own wish ; such reading of the Bible is not 
exegesis of the divine thought, but is eisegesis of 
the human desire. Too many read the Bible 
through spectacles of tradition and prejudice. 
Xo book suffers in this way as does the Word of 
God. A similar remark will apply to the teach- 
ing of the Bible regarding Melchizedek, and many 
other persons and subjects. Many of the diffi- 
culties in interpreting the Bible are of human 
manufacture; and so many of the objections 
made by agnostic critics are not really against 



r88 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

divine revelation, but against human misinterpre- 
tation. 

Let us study the Scripture references to this 
mysterious king. The first one is Genesis xiv. 
Abramis returning" from his pursuit of 
Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, 
and who had taken Lot and others as captives. 
Abram had now become bold and heroic. When 
in Egypt he was distrustful and pusillanimous; 
but now the spirit of family loyalty and divine 
obedience is strong in his soul. He won a glori- 
ous victory. He brought back Lot and the goods 
which had been taken, as well as the people. 
This expedition excited great attention, and won 
general admiration among the Canaanites, and 
the victorious band was hailed with joy as it 
returned in peace. Abram surprised all by the 
brilliant military genius which he displayed. We 
were prepared to see in him gentleness, benevo- 
lence, and magnanimity ; but we scarcely expected 
to see him the leader of heroic exploits, such as 
we are accustomed to associate with the names of 
Miltiades, Caesar, Cromwell, Napoleon, and many 
brave Britons and Americans of recent days. 
The king of Sodom went out to meet Abram, 
and he is filled with admiration over the success 
of this dashing expedition. Abram is now in 
the valley of Shaveh, or the level valley, which is 
the king's dale. This name it may have received 
LUSe it was used for military exercises and 
kingly sports; perhaps it was also a place of great 



WHO WAS MELCHIZEDEK? 189 

beauty, and it may have been associated in all 
subsequent times with the historic events here 
narrated. There Abram is met by Melchizedek, 
king of Salem. He is a much more illustrious 
personage than the king of Sodom. He is com- 
mendable for his personal excellence, his peace- 
loving disposition, and his religious spirit. He 
refreshed Abram with bread and wine. He thus 
expressed his gratitude to Abram, who had won 
for the land freedom, peace, and prosperity. It 
is simply ridiculous to find here any direct refer- 
ence to the Lord's supper. What could this an- 
cient king have known of that ordinance? The 
bread and wine may have been not only for the 
refreshment of Abram and his followers, but also 
as a symbol of the divine blessing. They thus 
recognized God as the true author of the military 
successes which had been achieved. Melchizedek 
combined in himself the offices of priest and king, 
as was not uncommon in patriarchal times; he 
was, as he has been called in this discourse, a 
"king-priest." Balaam was a prophet and Mel- 
chizedek a priest among heathen people. God 
thus, in marvellous ways, caused His light to shine 
among the benighted nations. The title given to 
Melchizedek is never given to Abram, and be- 
cause he was thus honored above Abram, the 
" father of the faithful," and the " friend of God," 
many Jewish and other commentators have con- 
sidered that he must have been a snpramundane 
being, and that his priesthood must have been 



iqo OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

something quite other than the patriarchal priest- 
hood. The fact also that Abram paid him tithes, 
tenths, emphasizes this opinion. These were the 
usual offerings to God, and were a recognition 
of the divine priesthood of Melchizedek. His 
priestly benediction on Abram tended also to 
confirm this opinion. No other priestly act is 
recorded of Melchizedek, but still others he may 
have frequently discharged. His hospitality was 
simply in harmony with the customs of that an- 
cient time and country. 

In Psalm ex. 4 we have the words " Thou art 
a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek"; 
and in the seventh chapter of Hebrews we have a 
full reference to Melchizedek, and an argument 
founded on the facts there stated. But none of 
these references justify us in supposing that 
he was Shem ; for Moses has continually spoken 
of Shem under his own proper name, and why 
should he now speak of him under another name? 

The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews tells 
us of Melchizedek that he was " without father, 
without mother, without descent, having neither 
beginning of days nor end of life." He could not, 
therefore, have been Shem, for his genealogy is 
clearly given in Scripture and is traced to Adam. 
Doth the name of Melchizedek and that of the city 
where he reigned were most appropriate to one who 
was priest and king, and the predecessor of the 
Messiah. There would be very little difficulty in 
the account in Genesis, were it not for the refer- 



WHO W 'AS MELCHIZEDEK > 191 

ence to Melchizedek in Hebrews, and the ques- 
tions which that passage has aroused. The question 
has often been asked, Where was Salem? Jerome 
makes Salem to be identical with a town near 
Scythopolis or Bethshan, which in his day was 
called Salem, and in which were extensive ruins 
which were called those of Melchizedek's palace. 
But it is now more common to make Salem Jeru- 
salem. It was probably called Salem at that time ; 
it is so called as late as the time of the psalmist. 
In Psalm lxxvi. 1, 2 we read: " In Judah is God 
known ; his name is great in Israel. In Salem also 
is his tabernacle and his dwelling-place in Zion." 
Later it was called Jebus, because it was possessed 
by the Jebusites, and later still Jerusalem. 

The valley of Shaveh is the valley east of Jeru- 
salem, through which the Kidron flows. Josephus 
asserts the identity of the two places, and he also 
asserts that the king's dale is in this immediate 
vicinity. We thus locate the place where Mel- 
chizedek met Abram, and we have an historical 
setting for Melchizedek himself. 

Not the Messiah. 

That he could not have been the Messiah is 
clearly seen from the language of the Epistle to 
the Hebrews. If he were the Christ, it could not 
be said with propriety that he " was made like the 
Son of God," for that would be saying that he was 
made like unto himself. Neither could it be said 
that Christ was constituted a priest "after the 



192 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

order of Melchizedek" ; for that would be affirm- 
ing that he was a type of Himself. A natural in- 
terpretation of this passage shows conclusively 
that he was not the Messiah. The statement that 
he was without father, without mother, and with- 
out descent, etc., has really in it no serious diffi- 
culty of interpretation. We know that in the 
estimation of the Jews it was very important that 
the line of the priesthood should be carefully kept ; 
that all their genealogies should be accurately pre- 
served, and that the direct descent of their priests 
from Aaron should be capable of conclusive de- 
monstration. But the writer affirms that in the 
case of Melchizedek there was no such genealogi- 
cal table ; that there was no record of the name 
of his father or mother; that he suddenly ap- 
peared, then mysteriously disappeared, and that 
thus he stood alone. He once crossed the track 
of Abram, as we have seen, at a most interesting 
time in the patriarch's life. He is then lost to 
the sacred writings for a thousand years; then, 
in a few words, he appears for a moment in the 
ancient psalm as a type of the coming Lord. He 
came again out of the shadows in the Epistle to 
the Hebrews, and then retired into eternal silence. 
The writer of the Epistle is discussing the priest- 
hood of Christ; and, as a priest, he, like Melchize- 
dek, stood alone; his name is not in the line of 
priests; lie pertained to another rather than to a 
priestly tribe; his ancestors are not mentioned as 
priests, and as a priest he had no descendants. 



WHO WAS MELCHIZEDEK? 193 

Thus, like Melchizedek, he had a lonely con- 
spicuity; as a priest he was absolutely unique, 
except for the likeness to Melchizedek. The 
genealogy of Christ as a man can be traced, but 
not as a priest ; and it is His priesthood which is 
the subject of discussion. Melchizedek may have 
had a very honorable ancestry, but it is not re- 
corded, for the names of his ancestors nowhere 
appear in the records of the priestly office. In 
like manner his descendants were utterly un- 
known ; so far as the genealogical records go, he 
was without descent. Under the Mosaic dispen- 
sation the law determined all things pertaining 
to the priestly office ; and in the time of Moses 
the Levites were required to serve from the age 
of thirty to fifty ; after passing fifty they were re- 
lieved from the more arduous duties of their 
office. Later they began their service at the age 
of twenty. But the writer of this Epistle tells us 
that regarding Melchizedek nothing of this kind 
occurred. No one knew when he entered on his 
office, and no one knew when he retired from it. 
vSo far as the records go — which were kept so 
carefully in all other cases — Melchizedek was 
without beginning of days or end of life. There 
is no difficulty at any of these points; we have 
really put the difficulties into the record, instead 
of finding them already there. After having dis- 
appeared for a thousand years, since the time of 
the psalmist, a reference to Melchizedek appears 
to teach the Hebrew Christians that it was the 
13 



194 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

purpose of God to abolish the Levitical priest- 
hood. Christ's priesthood is above that of Aaron 
and all priests. Melchizedek was a priest not by 
inheritance, but by divine appointment; so was 
Christ. Thus Christ was a priest not after the 
order of Aaron, but after the order of Melchizedek. 
This statement suggests the harmony between 
the priesthood of both as brought out in the uoth 
Psalm. The points of resemblance between the 
priesthood of Christ and Melchizedek are very 
striking. Neither was of the Levitical order; 
both were superior to Abram ; both were kings 
and priests; both were kings of peace and of 
righteousness ; and, so far as priestly records are 
concerned, neither had beginning of life nor end 
of days. Abram recognized in Melchizedek one 
higher in official standing as a minister of religion 
than himself. Abram gave Melchizedek the " top 
of the heap," as the Greek word rendered spoils 
in Hebrews vii. 4 literally means. After a battle 
the Greeks were accustomed to collect the spoils 
into a heap, and before they distributed them to 
themselves, they took off a portion from the top 
and gave it to the gods. So Abram honored Mel- 
chizedek; so in all things Christ ought to have 
the preeminence. 

Josephus has probably given us the correct view 
of Melchizedek; he makes him a Canaanitish 
prince, a man of noble character and godly life. 
He seems to have been a man raised up by God 
in an unlikely environment. He was a man whose 



WHO WAS MELCHIZEDEK f 195 

genealogy was veiled in mystery, so that in this 
particular, as in other respects, he is a type of 
Christ. All God's true children are kings and 
priests unto God. The lowliest son of God in 
our day is vastly higher in the kingdom of heaven 
than was even Melchizedek. We are heirs of 
God, and joint heirs with Jesus Christ. We are 
a preserved people for a reserved inheritance. 
In some sense, the very angels are our minister- 
ing servants. Let us rejoice in our high honors, 
and loyally perform our lowliest duties. 

When we return weary from some fierce conflict, 
there will be some servant of our divine King to 
minister refreshment in the hour of need. Like 
Abram we shall eat and be strengthened. Al- 
though Melchizedek could have had no thought of 
the Lord's Supper, we can in that ordinance re- 
joice that Christ gives Himself to us as the Bread 
of Life. To us, as weary pilgrims and as tired 
soldiers, He comes forth to cheer us in the path of 
duty. The weary march and the heavy fighting 
fit us for His divine companionship in the sacred 
ordinance. Fierce temptations assail us, the 
blood of the battle stains us ; but the hour of re- 
freshment assuredly will come. 

Let us strive to be God's servants for the re- 
freshment of our fellow-servants. Beautiful was 
Melchizedek as a type of Christ in his priestly and 
regal service. Moses did not claim to be either 
priest or king. David would not intrude into the 
priestly office. But we are both priests and kings. 



196 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

Melchizedek in his quiet, pure, and mysterious 
life may never have realized the great honor 
which was put upon him when in refreshing 
Abram he became a type of Christ. He gave to 
God the honor of Abram' s victory. Let us give 
God similar honor. Let us render similar service 
to our fellow-pilgrims, and let us ever lay our 
crowns, here and hereafter, at the pierced feet of 
him who was the Lord of both Abram and Mel- 
chizedek. 



XII. 

WAS THE DESTRUCTION OF SODOM NAT- 
URAL OR SUPERNATURAL? 



XII. 

WAS THE DESTRUCTION OF SODOM 
NATURAL OR SUPERNATURAL? 

The destruction of Sodom and the other cities 
of the Jordanic circle, as given in Genesis xix. 
23-28, is one of the most solemn events recorded 
in Scripture. The physical features of this ter- 
rible disaster are deeply impressive, and the moral 
lessons are profoundly instructive. It is quite 
certain that Sodom was a place of considerable 
importance. Like the other four cities of the 
plain, it had a king of its own, and it clearly was 
the chief town of the Pentapolis. Its name has 
gone throughout the world as the synonym of 
degrading vice. These Jordanic cities are first 
named in Genesis x. 19 as belonging to the Can- 
aanites. They are next mentioned in Genesis 
xiii. 10-13 i n connection with the choice made 
by Lot, when he and Abram stood together be- 
tween Bethel and Ai. Before them, and dis- 
tinctly in view, was at least a part of the " circle 
of Jordan." Then it was conspicuous for the 
abundance of its streams, the greenness of its 
grass, and the attractiveness of all its features. 
It is spoken of at that time as a " garden of Jeho- 
vah. " The " ciccar of Jordan" is frequently men- 



200 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

tioned as the technical expression used to describe 
these towns. 

Meaning of Sodom. 

It is difficult to be absolutely certain as to the 
meaning of the name Sodom. Some writers affirm 
that it means "burning''; but others equally 
learned make it mean " vineyard" ; and still others 
connect it with a word meaning to enclose or to 
fortify. Probably the word burning better than 
any other expresses the meaning, although it is 
possible that the name has this meaning from the 
subsequent catastrophe. It may, however, be 
true that fire had already passed over this valley 
previous to the great destruction now under con- 
sideration. In the account which we have of the 
battle of the kings, we are told in Genesis xiv. 10 
that "the vale of Siddim was full of slime-pits. " 
This expression denotes places where petroleum, 
which became by evaporation bitumen, oozed out 
of the ground, or places which had been exca- 
vated in securing bitumen to be employed as 
cement in the construction of the houses erected 
here. In Deuteronomy the place is spoken of as 
never again to be inhabited; and in several Scrip- 
tures it is referred to as a place where no man was 
abiding, a land turned to ashes, as overthrown 
and burned, and as cities in ashes at the time of 
the writers. The fate of the cities is referred to 
in the Xew Testament as a solemn warning to 
those who should live ungodly. Our Lord makes 



THE DESTRUCTION OF SODOM. 201 

the punishment of those who reject His gospel, 
and who refuse to listen to His disciples, as worse 
than that of the people of these doomed cities. 
Josephus speaks of the five cities whose ashes ap- 
pear even in the fruit of the valleys which these 
cities once occupied. 

Location of These Cities. 

Once it was very common to suppose that the 
site of these cities is the basin now occupied by 
the Dead Sea. This supposition makes the Dead 
Sea to have been caused by the fearful catastrophe 
which destroyed the cities. The idea was that the 
Jordan ran through the entire length of the Ghor 
or valley from the base of Mount Hermon to the 
Gulf of Akaba. This theory was long maintained 
with great tenacity, and the evidence in its sup- 
port seemed to be reasonably strong. It is now, 
however, abandoned by the most careful students 
of the locality and of the Scripture narrative. 
The subject, it is admitted, is surrounded by con- 
siderable difficulty; but although Burckhardt dis- 
covered the valley of the Arabah between the 
Dead Sea and the Red Sea, and so gave probabil- 
ity to the idea that the Jordan once flowed through 
this valley to the Red Sea, until the convulsion 
which overthrew the cities, the theory is now seen 
to be untenable. It is admitted that it is an at- 
tractive theory; bat almost midway between the 
two seas there is a watershed seven hundred and 
eighty-seven feet above the ocean level, and north 



:o: OLD TESTAMENT DIFEICULTIES. 

oi it streams flow into the Dead Sea, and streams 
to the south flow into the Gulf of Akaba. It is 
also affirmed, as the result of careful measure- 
ments, that the Gulf of Akaba is thirty-five feet 
higher than the Mediterranean Sea; it is, there- 
fore, more than thirteen hundred feet above the 
Dead Sea and the Jordan valley. Dean Stanley 
has well said that a convulsion which would have 
depressed the valley of the Jordan so far below 
the Mediterranean would have shattered Palestine 
to its centre. Perhaps the whole valley, from 
the base of Hermon to the Red Sea, was once an 
arm of the Indian Ocean or adjoining seas. When 
changes came, which caused the sea somewhat to 
subside, the three lakes now found in this valley 
were left with the Jordan as their connecting 
river. 

It is still difficult, notwithstanding all the dis- 
coveries that have been made, to locate with cer- 
tainty these cities of the plain. Josephus speaks 
indefinitely of Sodom, but he refers to Zoar in 
such terms as to suggest that it was at the south 
end of the sea. Eusebius uses language of the 
same general purport. This was the opinion of 
most travellers during the Middle Ages, and is still 
that of the majority of modern visitors and topog- 
raphers. Dr. Edward Robinson is very clear 
and emphatic in his affirmations to that effect. 
We know that the southern end of the sea is quite 
distinct from all other parts as to its depth; the 
northern part of the lake being thirteen hundred 



THE DESTRUCTION OF SODOM. 203 

feet deep, and the southern being only thirteen feet 
deep, indicating that this latter part is of recent 
formation. The name Usdum, given to the ridge 
of salt at the southwest corner, seems to locate 
Sodom. The name Amrah, given to a valley 
among the mountains in this general neighbor- 
hood, it is easily seen is a modification of the word 
Gomorrha. Mr. Tristram, however, for a time 
gave it as his opinion that the cities were at the 
northern and not at the southern end of the sea ; but 
later he modified this view, and adopted the tradi- 
tional opinion in its stead. Dr. Selah Merrill, whose 
long residence in Palestine, and whose careful 
study of all its features, give his opinions weight, 
locates the cities at the northern end, and Sir J. 
W. Dawson adopts the opinion of Dr. Merrill in 
this regard. With the utmost modesty, and yet 
with considerable certainty, the traditional view 
is presented in these lectures. It is not plain, as 
was once the current opinion, that these five cities 
were submerged in the lake. It was once affirmed 
that the walls, columns, and capitals of great build- 
ings were discerned below the water; but that 
opinion is now virtually abandoned by all whose 
authority is of any weight. It is not even certain 
that the destruction was caused by an overflow of 
water ; the probability is that the overflow of water 
was a comparatively unimportant element in the 
catastrophe. It is affirmed by those who favor 
the northern end of the lake that Abram and Lot 
could not see Sodom as they stood between Bethel 



264 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

and Ai, except the cities were located at the 
northern end of the lake. But it should be borne 
in mind that if they saw a part of the circle, that 
fact would meet all the requirements of the his- 
tory. Neither is the account of the invasion of 
the five kings conclusive evidence that the cities 
were at the northern end of the lake ; nor yet is it 
convincing as to that location when reference is 
made to Abram's view of the evidences of de- 
struction as he witnessed them from some point 
near Hebron. The Scripture reference to Zoar 
gives great weight to the traditional view that the 
cities were at the southern end of the lake. No 
one can carefully note the differences between the 
depths of the lower part of the lake and its other 
portions, to which reference has been made, with- 
out feeling that some terrible catastrophe produced 
the portion of the lake below the Tongue, or El- 
Lisan. 

The Dead Sea. 

In studying this sea we must entirely divest our 
minds of all the superstitions which are attached 
to it by all mediaeval and by some modern trav- 
ellers. 

The idea that no bird could fly across the sur- 
face without immediately perishing, and that the 
touch of its water was fatal to health, and even to 
life, is an utterly groundless and even ridiculous 
superstition. Ignorant monks are largely respon- 
sible for these foolish and false notions. There 



THE DESTRUCTION OF SODOM. 205 

is not in them a single element of truth. Whether 
seen in sunshine or storm, the Dead Sea is an im- 
pressive and beautiful sheet of water. Its waters 
are pellucid to a remarkable degree, and they are 
also free from the pollution common to many of 
our inland lakes. The neighborhood of this sea 
before the destruction of Sodom was a favorite 
resort for invalids and pleasure-seekers, and it 
would not be at all surprising if it should once 
more become an attractive place for travellers, 
and, at certain seasons of the year, for invalids. 
Great hotels may yet be erected on its shores, and 
lines of railways may carry travellers to its vicin- 
ity. Nothing can surpass the brilliant colors seen 
in its direction and over the mountains of Moab 
as one looks out over both from the Mount of 
Olives. The brilliant tints in Holman Hunt's 
" Scapegoat" are not an exaggeration of the 
glowing colors over sea and mountains under the 
rays of the setting sun. No one who has enjoyed 
that sight will ever forget the glory of the burn- 
ished mountains and the resplendent sea. The 
enormous evaporation explains in part these at- 
mospheric effects, which transform sea, moun- 
tains, and sky into a fairyland of wondrous splen- 
dor and glory. 

Its Names. 

The Dead Sea is a name entirely unknown to 
Bible writers. They call it the Salt Sea, the Sea 
of the Plain, the East Sea, and once simply The 



206 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

Sea. The Greeks and the Romans called it the 
Asphaltic Lake. The absence of living creatures 
in its waters, and the supposed deadly influence 
of its neighborhood, led to its being- called the 
Dead Sea. The Arabs call it Bahr Lut, or the 
of Lot. Until after the fearful catastrophe, 
with which its name is associated, no notions of 
horror attach to its name. The valley of the Dead 
Sea and of the Jordan is between fifteen and six- 
teen miles from Jerusalem. The Mediterranean 
Sea is twenty-six hundred feet below Jerusalem, 
but this descent is spread over about thirty-five 
miles; recent and skilful measurements show that 
the Dead Sea is thirteen hundred feet below the 
Mediterranean, and almost four thousand feet be- 
low Jerusalem, although the distance is less than 
half that to the Mediterranean. Sir J. W. Daw- 
son informs us that the descent from Jerusalem 
to the Jordan is about the rate of one foot in 
twenty feet. The differences in climate are cor- 
respondingly great. One may leave a temperate 
climate at Jerusalem, go fifteen miles, and find a 
tropical climate at the Jordan; one may leave, as 

true in January, [884, snow-drifts five feet 
deep at the Jaffa Gate at Jerusalem, go fifteen 
miles to Jericho, and find there a warm and 
even a sultry atmosphere. The marked diversi- 
ties in climate and soil in Palestine must have had 

at influence on the habits and character of 
the people. The Dead Sea occupies the lowest 
part of the crevasse, about two hundred and fifty 



THE DESTRUCTION OF SODOM, 207 

miles long, reaching from the foot of Mount Her- 
mon to the Gulf of Akaba. The Dead Sea is 
forty-six miles long, and is over ten miles wide 
at its greatest breadth. Its area is three hundred 
square miles. It receives numerous perennial 
streams and winter torrents on the east and south, 
besides the full stream of the Jordan, which pours 
into it, it is estimated, six million tons of water 
daily; and this entire amount is carried off by 
the great evaporation. It is not difficult to see 
how the hot and dry atmosphere is capable of 
absorbing this enormous quantity of water. The 
sea has no outlet, visible or invisible. In the 
nature of the case, it cannot have an outlet, ex- 
cept there be, as was once supposed, a great pit 
at its bottom, leading to the centre of the earth. 
It is the most depressed sheet of water on the 
globe. Lake Urmia in Persia, seven miles from 
the town of Urmia, is said to be more salt than 
the Dead Sea, and Lake Elton, which is on the 
steppes east of the Volga, and which supplies a 
great part of the salt of Russia, is also, perhaps, 
more salt, although it is difficult to get authorita- 
tive figures. The great Salt Lake of Utah has 
marked features in common with the Dead Sea; 
and this physical likeness confirmed the early 
Mormons in the belief that this salt sea and its 
river Jordan were indeed parts of a second land of 
promise. The American salt sea is daily losing 
its saltness, and what the final result will be it is 
difficult to determine. The fish, which are car- 



2oS OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

lied down by the Jordan to the Dead Sea, die 
almost immediately, and even fish accustomed to 
the Mediterranean die soon in the Dead Sea. 
The Jordan pushes its brown waters for a consid- 
erable distance into the sea, but it soon loses its 
vitality and becomes sluggish. In the afternoon 
a deep haze rises and hangs over the sea and the 
vicinity, and it may be well likened to " the smoke 
going up forever and ever." 

The huge barrier of fossil salt, which is at the 
south end, accounts in part for the saltness of the 
sea, and the great evaporation of fresh water com- 
pletes the result in that direction. The waters 
are usually placid, and are quite inodorous, blue, 
limpid, and beautiful. The degree of saltness 
depends naturally upon the nearness of fresh- 
water streams pouring into the sea. The waters 
have a heavy and oily aspect. A gallon of dis- 
tilled water weighs ten pounds ; a gallon of Dead 
Sea water twelve and a quarter pounds. A large 
part of this extra weight is chloride of sodium, 
or common salt; chloride of magnesium causes 
the bitter taste, and chloride of calcium gives it 
its oily feeling. So dense is the water that float- 
ing is easy, but sinking is difficult; swimming is 
also difficult, as the feet constantly rise to the sur- 
face. One rolls about in the water like a cork 
tub, and one can almost sit in it as he would in a 
rocking-chair. Horses experience strange sensa- 
tions in it, as their feet constantly rise above the 
water. Irritation of tie skin often results from 



THE DESTRUCTION OF SODOM. 209 

bathing, especially if there are abrasions of the 
skin, as there are sure to be in a country where 
insects so abound. In 1848 Lieutenant Lynch, of 
the United States navy, spent three weeks in a 
survey of the Dead Sea. It is said that, while 
coming in metallic boats into the sea from the Jor- 
dan, he met a gale, and the heavy waves struck the 
boat as if they were the sledge-hammers of Titans. 
Ducks occasionally may be seen floating on the 
water, utterly contradicting the mediaeval theory 
regarding the water and its immediate atmosphere. 
Bare mountain ranges flank the sea, rising from 
fifteen hundred to two thousand feet. 

Great quantities of bitumen, sulphur, and musca 
are found on the shores ; from the latter souvenirs 
are made and offered for sale in Bethlehem and 
Jerusalem ; this substance takes on a fine polish, 
and will burn like cannel coal, but emits an al- 
most intolerable odor. The low promontory called 
"El-Lisan," the Tongue, pushes westward and 
northward into the sea from the eastern shore ; it is 
ten miles long and from five to six miles wide. The 
greatest depth of the sea is thirteen hundred feet, 
but south of the Tongue the circular bay, as already 
remarked, is only about thirteen feet deep. The 
depth of the sea varies considerably according to 
the season. It is certainly a remarkable sheet of 
water. Lake Sir-I-Kol is fifteen thousand six 
hundred feet above the level of the sea; this is the 
most elevated sheet of water on the globe, and it 
is well called by the natives, Bam-i-daniah> mean- 
14 



2i o or n TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

ing u the roof of the world." The river Oxus rises 
in this lake. As it is the most elevated body of 
water, so the Dead Sea is the most depressed. 
Beautiful as it is in many respects, it is still a 
Steaming caldron, and so great is the evaporation 
that it can never he filled to overflowing. The 
most impressive thought in Norway, as one 
watches the splendor of the midnight sun, is that 
of deep and almost holy awe, in the midst of the 
profound silence and the golden sunshine of the 
midnight hour. In like manner, a sense of death- 
like silence, of deepest awe, and of the conscious- 
ness of a holy presence impresses the mind and 
heart as one stands by the shores of this mysteri- 
ous sea. 

Physical Causes of the Catastrophe. 

To the discussion of this thought all previous 
remarks have tended. Here we are to see the 
meeting of the natural and the supernatural. If 
we find adequate physical causes for the fearful 
cataclysm, let no one say that we on that account 
deny the supernatural element in the destruction 
of Sodom. God can avail Himself of His resources 
stored up in the heart of the earth as truly as of 
His resources in the region vaguely called the 
heavens. They are inadequate, and often inac- 
curate, interpreters of the Scriptures who refuse 
e the presence of God in the physical as well 
as in the spiritual forces employed. These inter- 
preters are often unfair to those who see God as 



THE DESTRUCTIOX OF SODOM. 21 1 

truly on earth as in heaven. The men who say 
that if we give due place to physical phenomena 
we are disloyal to the Scripture and its divine 
author ; who say that if Jonah goes the Bible goes, 
the church goes, and Jesus goes, are guilty of ex- 
treme folly, alike in their interpretations of and 
deductions from Holy Scripture. We firmly be- 
lieve in the historicity of the story of Jonah, but 
if it could be proved that the story were not his- 
toric, neither the Bible nor Jesus would go. We 
firmly believe that the divine character and mis- 
sion of Jesus Christ do not depend for their reality 
upon any man's interpretation of the story of 
Jonah. Men who make statements of this kind 
play directly into the hands of unbelievers ; such 
men do all in their power to give away much of 
their case. Unbelievers will attack the outposts 
of these men, and perhaps carry some insignifi- 
cant place of defence, and then, in harmony with 
the admission of these interpreters, unbelievers 
will claim that they have captured the citadel. 

We may believe that the Bible does not say, 
when fairly interpreted, that the sun and moon 
stood still at the command of Joshua; indeed, we 
may be unable to discover that Joshua really ever 
gave such a command. Do we therefore deny 
the supernatural? Are we therefore infidel toward 
the Bible and disloyal toward God? Who has the 
right so to assert? In adopting such an interpre- 
tation we may be simply showing our loyalty to 
the exact teaching of the Bible and our devotion 



2 i 2 01 1 1 / MEN T DIFFICUL TIES. 

to its divine author. Personally we may believe 
that ravens fed Elijah at the brook Cherith; but 

if another interprets the word orcbim, translated 
ravens in our common version, to mean, as it may 
mean, with slight vowel changes which no sen- 
sible man considers to be authoritative, "Ara- 
bians," or "merchants," or "the people of Orbi," 
a neighboring town, what right have we to charge 
him with denying the Bible? He may be only the 
more strict in his adherence to the Bible. Some 
men think that if we deny or doubt their inter- 
pretation of certain difficult passages we are dis- 
believers of the Bible and no better than publi- 
cans and sinners. Their word they deem to be 
virtually God's word. Who made these men 
masters in Israel? Whence gained they such 
wisdom? The more unscholarly they are the 
more authoritative do they become. Spiritual 
insight into the Bible is one thing; it is the chief 
thing in studying certain passages. But other 
parts can be understood only by accurate scholar- 
ship as the result of prolonged and devout study 
of history, philology, archeology, and related 
sciences. Certain peripatetic evangelists are 
largely responsible for these unscholarly inter- 
pretations, illogical deductions, and unscriptural 
affirmations. However good their intentions 
may be, the practical result of their methods is 
to weaken the authority of Scripture, and to dis- 
honor its divine Author. 

In discovering the attendant physical phenom- 



THE DESTRUCTION OF SODOM. 213 

ena in the destruction of Sodom we recognize God 
as the God of heaven and earth, and recognize 
this fearful catastrophe as perfectly natural, so 
far as regards the means employed, and as en- 
tirely supernatural so far as regards their employ- 
ment at that time, for that purpose, and in the 
severe degree which secured the result. We are 
told in Genesis xiv. 10, as we have already seen, 
that slime-pits abounded in this vicinity. What 
are slime-pits ? Simply petroleum wells. Where- 
ever bitumen abounds eruptions are liable to 
occur. Petroleum exudes from the rocks, both 
on the sides and on the bottom, of the Dead Sea ; 
it is then hardened by evaporation, and asphal- 
tum is formed. We know that this plain was 
liable to earthquakes and volcanic eruptions from 
the earliest times of which we have any record. 
We know that the Dead Sea sends up great 
masses of asphaltum, especially when earthquakes 
occur, as in 1834 and in 1837. Sir J. W. Dawson 
is as loyal, humble, and devout as a believer as 
he is learned, accurate, and fearless as a scientist; 
and he shows that this valley was subject to con- 
ditions which frequently obtain in the oil regions 
of our own country and Canada. He shows that 
a few years ago, in the oil district of Petrolia 
in Canada, a borehole struck a reservoir of gas 
which rushed up with tremendous force, carrying 
with it a great quantity of petroleum. This gas 
at once took fire, rising in a tall column of flame, 
and burning petroleum spread over the ground, 



214 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES, 

Betting fire to many tanks in the vicinity. A village 
was burned, and several lives were lost; a whirl- 
wind was caused, which carried dense smoke into 
the air, and soon burning bitumen fell in showers. 
This is almost an exact description of what hap- 
pened in Sodom when it is said that God rained 
upon it brimstone and fire, that is, burning brim- 
stone, out of heaven. The description of the de- 
struction of Petrolia is in many features a descrip- 
tion of the destruction of Sodom. Nothing is 
more certain than that science supports the Bible. 
Prof. G. F. Wright, of Oberlin College, a man 
who stands high in the ranks of scientists, shows 
clearly in his volume, " Scientific Aspects of 
Christian Evidences," that the whole region 
about the Dead Sea has the appearance now of 
being an abandoned "oil district," and that all 
the conditions for the catastrophe described in the 
Bible were present in the inflammable accumula- 
tions of oil and gas reservoirs. 

We have only to suppose that at the time of the 
destruction quantities of gas and petroleum ex- 
isted below the plain; then their escape through 
a fissure would produce the results described. 
These combustible materials might be ignited by 
lightning Calling upon them, or by a convulsion 
in the earth. Rising into the heavens, they would 
then fall like fiery rain upon the earth. There 
would be an eruption of saline water forming a 
brine thick with mud. Lot's wife, no doubt, was 
overtaken and suffocated by this saline storm, and 



THE DESTRUCTION OF SODOM. 215 

her body was so encrusted as to become not a 
pillar, but, as the original has it, a mound of salt. 
The exhaustion of these subterranean reservoirs 
would cause a subsidence of the earth, and all the 
facts described in the Scripture would follow in 
the most natural way. We do God and the Bible 
great injustice when we shut out the natural phe- 
nomena from their appropriate share in this 
supernatural event. God is as much the God of 
the earth beneath as of the heaven above. Every 
unprejudiced geologist must see that the narra- 
tive in Genesis is in perfect harmony with the 
geological features of the district. Nothing but 
the occurrence of the events could have given rise 
to the narrative, and from a scientific point of 
view the account is wonderfully harmonious with 
all the facts which scientific investigation has dis- 
covered in the neighborhood. In giving appro- 
priate place to these physical phenomena we not 
only do not detract from the miraculous character 
of the catastrophe, but we give it the greater 
prominence, because we see that in the soil itself 
God had stored up all the forces for its produc- 
tion. There is nothing in the Bible narrative 
suggestive of the wild myths which have often 
been associated with this overthrow ; but all the 
statements are in the fullest accordance with the 
physical possibilities of that historic valley. 



216 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

Lessons. 

We see here how God can punish sinners with 
physical forces associated with their own sin. We 
sec also the danger of looking- back. Looking 
back leads to going back, and going back is per- 
dition. Obedience would have saved Lot's wife; 
disobedience wrought her utter bodily destruc- 
tion. It is possible to be nearly saved and yet be 
wholly lost. Anxiety for salvation is not salva- 
tion. Conviction is not conversion. 

Sin may abound amid the most charming en- 
vironments. Early civilizations gathered about 
beautiful locations. Civilization without spiritual 
religion is weakness and danger. God has hidden 
fountains of judgment about every man's path. 
Destruction may come in every walk of life. 

Even the righteous with difficulty are saved. 
Angels had to lay hold of Lot and hasten him 
from Sodom. Lot was saved as by fire, but his 
whole nature was contaminated by his evil sur- 
roundings. Stay not in the plain. Look not 
backward to Sodom, but forward and upward to 
Jesus. 



XIII. 

DID GOD MEAN THAT ABRAHAM SHOULD 
REALLY OFFER ISAAC? 



XIII. 

DID GOD MEAN THAT ABRAHAM 
SHOULD REALLY OFFER ISAAC? 

The account of the trial, triumph, and reward 
of Abraham's faith is found in the twenty-second 
chapter of Genesis. Abram has now become 
Abraham, and Sarai has become Sarah, and this 
change in the names indicates a new relation to 
God, and suggests a new development of their 
character. We have passed through several 
stages of great interest in the remarkable life of 
the "friend of God." We have seen him leaving 
country and kin at God's call; and we have seen 
him in the land of strangers because of the stress 
of famine. We have seen him returning to his 
own country, and being separated from Lot, who 
selfishly sought richer pastures for his numer- 
ous flocks. We have seen Abraham winning 
superb victories over plundering kings and ma- 
rauding hordes. We have seen him in the midst 
of grievous doubts about his posterity; and we 
have seen him surrendering his paternal affec- 
tion in relation to the son of his bond-maid. We 
have seen him rejoicing in the possession of a 
son, whose mother was Sarah, and whose birth 
was in fulfilment of glorious promises from God. 



220 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

But we arc now to see him passing through the 
most difficult experience of his heroic career. It 
is always fascinatingly interesting to see illus- 
trious characters in trying situations, conquering 
great difficulties, and rising superior over subtle 
temptations under the inspiration of great moral 
principles. Abraham seemed at this time to have 
been approaching the serene evening of his 
troubled life; the early morning was over, the 
ruffled noon had passed, and a calm and trium- 
phant evening seemed to have come. But just 
then the severest trial he had ever known came 
upon him like a thunderbolt out of a clear sky. 
The most appalling ordeal now summons him to 
a new test of faith. The intensity of the strain 
which he must suffer baffles all description; it 
even exhausts all our power of thought. The 
terrible blow must be struck with his own hand. 
God's precept seems to be antagonistic to God's 
promise. Never did so terrible trial come to a 
child of God, and never did a child of God win a 
more glorious triumph. 

The Severe Trial of Abraham's Faith. 

All the circumstances of this trial combine to 
make it extremely severe. To be the means of 
putting a human being to death as a holocaust 
was a terrible thought. Perhaps Abraham was 
not unfamiliar with human sacrifices as offered by 
the Canaanites and the early Chaldeans; but the 
peculiar nature of his trial must have severely 



SHOULD ABRAHAM OFFER ISAAC? 221 

tested his faith in God as a holy Being. Could 
God give a command to any man to destroy his 
own child? Was not Isaac the child of special 
promise and hope? Did not the future salvation, 
temporal and spiritual, of millions rest upon his 
life? Could God give a command which should 
involve such fearful consequences? The thought 
of offering any one in sacrifice is terrible; but 
when the victim is his own son, and such a son 
as Isaac, the command is ineffably severe. The 
language of the command must have lacerated 
the heart of Abraham to its very core. Isaac is 
called "thy son," "thine only son, Isaac, whom 
thou lovest. " The terms of this command must 
have gone like sharp swords to the soul of Abra- 
ham ; they must have pierced his heart, even as 
his knife was to pierce the body of Isaac. It 
would be difficult to imagine a greater accumula- 
tion of affectionate terms for testing parental love. 
But we must not suppose that God did this " to 
tempt" Abraham in the ordinary meaning of the 
word tempt. The word is here used in the sense 
of try, prove, or test; in the Revised Version the 
word is correctly translated "did prove." The 
ordinary meaning of tempt is to solicit to evil, and 
in this sense, as the Apostle James teaches us, 
God tempteth no man. The Hebrew word nissah 
is, without doubt, correctly translated tried, tested, 
or proved. All God's children must pass through 
severe trials of their faith, and Abraham can be 
no exception. God had only one Son without sin; 



OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

but God did not have even one Son without suffer- 
ing. But God graduates our trials according to 
our strength. Abraham is now able to endure a 
trial of great force, for he has already developed 
a sublime moral heroism. The language of the 
command must have been so understood by Abra- 
ham that Isaac was to be offered, not simply as a 
spiritual self-surrender, but really as a burnt- 
offering. Sublime, indeed, was the faith which 
did not stagger at this command ! It is true that 
at this time no formal prohibition, like that of 
the Mosaic code, had been issued against human 
sacrifices; but every instinct in Abraham's heart, 
as the father of Isaac and as a son of God, must 
have opposed his obedience to the command, ex- 
cept for his triumphant faith in God's wisdom, 
love, and power. 

The divine origin of the command adds to the 
severity of the trial. It is distinctly affirmed that 
it was God who proved Abraham's faith. Could 
a God who was just and holy issue such a com- 
mand? This question might well tax Abraham's 
faith ; it sometimes taxes the faith of men even 
to this hour. This command has been a fruitful 
theme of cavil with the enemies of divine revela- 
tion through all the centuries. It is positively 
affirmed by some that it is utterly inconsistent 
with the attributes of a holy God. Some have 
endeavored to remove the difficulty by declaring 
that the entire narrative is mythical; some that it 
was merely a subjective impulse on the part of 



SHOULD ABRAHAM OFFER ISAAC? 223 

Abraham, and others that it was directly inspired 
by Satan. But it is not too much to say that these 
suppositions are more difficult of belief than is 
the plain statement of the narrative. God as the 
Author of life can take it away as it pleases Him 
without any shadow of injustice. He did not give 
life to Isaac upon the condition that it was to be 
taken away only by the event which we call death. 
The conduct of Junius Brutus, who passed the 
sentence upon his own children that before his 
eyes they should be beaten to death with rods, 
has been justified by reputable historians and 
moralists, because of the circumstances of the 
case. Brutus owed this duty to his country. Did 
Abraham owe less duty to his God? Abraham 
seems now to have been on intimate terms with 
God; he readily distinguished the voice of God 
from all other voices. It is the high dignity of a 
moral being that he is placed in circumstances of 
moral probation. God had a lofty purpose in ap- 
plying this heart-searching test to Abraham, and 
only He who knows the heart and who is holy, 
just, and good, can determine the right tests which 
are to be employed for reaching the highest moral 
ends. 

The event does present many and great diffi- 
culties, but it also suggests reasonable explana- 
tions. We cannot suppose that Abraham was in 
error in believing that God called for the actual 
sacrifice, but we know that this was an exceptional 
command for a unique occasion. We know also 



224 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

with absolute certainty that this command does 
not authorize human sacrifices; on the contrary, 
the result shows that God virtually prohibits hu- 
man sacrifice. We must bear in mind also that 
God never intended that the command would be 
literally executed. He knew from the beginning 
what the result would be; He foresaw the faith of 
His servant, and He knew when He gave the com- 
mand that He would intervene at the right moment 
to save the father's heart and the boy's life. His 
purpose was to test Abraham's faith. This signal 
instance of unquestioning submission to the will 
of God has been a shining light upon the path of 
many to cheer them in the way of obedience. 
Had the impulse been from Abraham's own mind, 
desiring to rise above his heathen neighbors in 
the value of his offering", the narrative would not 
represent God as giving the command. Abraham 
is to rise to loftier heights of faith than he had 
vet attained; his faith is to be perfected. He 
must not trust in the life of Isaac, but rather in 
the promise of God. He must give his son up as 
if he were dead, so that he may receive him as a 
gift from God, who, as the writer to the Hebrews 
tells us, Abraham believed could raise him from 
the dead. 

' there is a still higher thought which must 
enter into this whole discussion. The difficulty 
is largely removed when we consider that there 
is here a typical reference to the sacrifice of 
Christ. When the heathen practised human 



SHOULD ABRAHAM OFFER ISAAC? 225 

sacrifices their act implied their sense of the in- 
sufficiency of animal sacrifices. The true idea of 
sacrifice was fulfilled in Christ of whom Isaac was 
only a type. Isaac's sacrifice was not accom- 
plished; it foreshadowed its completion in Jesus 
Christ, who in the fashion of man became obedient 
unto the death of the cross. We must see, indeed 
we cannot help seeing, this fuller meaning in this 
ancient narrative. In John viii. 56, Jesus, when 
addressing the unbelieving Jews, said: "Your 
father Abraham rejoiced to see my day ; and he 
saw it, and was glad." On what occasion in 
Abraham's life could these words so fittingly have 
their application as in his constructive offering of 
Isaac? It is not here said that Abraham rejoiced 
to see Christ Himself, but to see His day. This 
must imply that it was the peculiar day or hour 
in Christ's life which gave that life its essential 
character, which Abraham actually saw. What 
was that day or hour but the one to which Christ 
so often referred as "my hour — the hour," the 
time when he was betrayed into the hands of 
sinners? The laying down of his life constituted 
Jesus the Redeemer of the world. When Abra- 
ham constructively sacrificed his only son, he saw 
Christ's day as at no other time in his life. This 
is the natural interpretation of our Lord's refer- 
ence to Abraham. If the entire significance of 
this mysterious command of God was a trial of 
Abraham's faith, that result could have been se- 
cured without directing Abraham to the place 
*5 



226 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

which later was the site of Jerusalem, and to offer 
Up his sacrifice Oil or near the very spot where 
afterward the Son of God gave His life for the re- 
demption of men. Without at all forcing the 
natural meaning of Scripture, we cannot help 
seeing in Abraham's sacrifice a suggestion of the 
love of God which led Him to give His "only be- 
gotten Son" for a lost world, and in the obedience 
of Isaac we cannot fail to be reminded of Him who 
bore His cross to Calvary and died thereon as a 
willing sacrifice for the sins of men. 

The Transcendent Victory of Faith. 

This was the grand crisis, the crowning event, 
the glorious victory in the history of the patriarch. 
He was called to a high destiny; he has already 
been taught to believe in God on His bare promise ; 
and he has been taken into covenant with Jeho- 
vah. More and more does the glory of God shine 
in his faith and devotion. He is now to show 
that he is as one born again, that he is dead to 
self and alive to God. But he would have been 
less than human if this terrible test did not cause 
him indescribable pain. But his obedience was 
prompt; he rose up early in the morning and pre- 
pared for the journey. What a morning that 
must have been in Abraham's tent! See him 
starting with his young men and Isaac, the wood 
being prepared for the burnt-offering! Did he 
tell Sarah of the command? Perhaps he had not 
the courage; her affection for Isaac might have 



SHOULD ABRAHAM OFFER ISAAC? 227 

overpowered Abraham's faith. What wonderful 
thoughts must have been in his tender, obedient, 
brave, but breaking heart! The brief, senten- 
tious, and somewhat broken clauses of the narra- 
tive at this point finely set forth his calm deliber- 
ation and his unflinching heroism. No one better 
than he could have appreciated the apparent in- 
consistency between the divine precept and the 
divine promise concerning Isaac ; but faith glori- 
ously triumphed. Still the moral difficulty of 
offering a human sacrifice remained ; and its only 
solution was in the divine command. The divine 
Creator, within the limits of absolute rectitude, 
will do right even though human reason cannot 
understand the divine action. The story is told 
with exquisite simplicity. The distance from 
Beersheba to Moriah, the Salem of Melchizedek, 
is about forty-five miles. Perhaps the first day 
was somewhat broken by the necessary prepara- 
tions; we may, therefore, assume that they 
travelled fifteen miles that day, twenty on the 
second day, and on the third day they would come 
early within sight of the appointed place. Jewish 
tradition tells us that the place was indicated by 
a cloud of glory or a pillar of fire. Behold the 
solemn procession ! Was there ever such a journey 
taken on this earth? Abraham commands his 
young men to remain behind while he and the 
young lad go forward to worship. He dare not 
open his heart in speech in the presence of his 
servants. They might have interposed to prevent 



228 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

the execution of his purpose; they might have 
believed that lie was actually beside himself. On 
what grounds did Abraham intimate that he and 
the lad would return to the^ servants? Was this 
an act of pardonable dissimulation? Was it a 
somewhat confused utterance? Was it not rather 
an unconscious prophecy? Was it not still more 
fully the voice of his all-conquering faith? He 
must conceal his full purpose from his servants. 
There is wonderful pathos in the words of the 
seventh verse, "my father" and "my son." Did 
not Abraham even now account that God was able 
to raise his son even from the dead? Behold 
Isaac with the wood of the burnt-offering upon 
his shoulder ! Josephus reports the tradition that 
he was now twenty-five years old ; he certainly was 
old enough and strong enough to resist if his spirit 
had not been sweetly obedient. We cannot help 
beholding in him a type of our blessed Lord bear- 
ing His cross, perhaps to the same place. A 
silence, both dreadful and mysterious, must have 
fallen on both father and son, which was broken 
by Isaac's question regarding a lamb for a burnt- 
offering. This question must have gone to Abra- 
ham's heart with terrible pain. If his heart could 
have relented, that question from his beloved and 
innocent boy would have melted it into compas- 
sion. Only the scenes of Gcthsemane and Cal- 
vary surpass in pathos and tenderness this journey 
to the sacrificial altar. Surely it must have 
dawned upon Isaac that he was himself to be the 



SHOULD ABRAHAM OFFER ISAAC? 229 

sacrificial victim. Wonderful is Abraham's reply, 
" God will provide Himself a lamb for a burnt- 
offering. " This is the utterance of heroic faith 
and not pious dissimulation. Silence then seems 
again to have fallen upon both as they went on 
together ; it was a terrible moment for father and 
son. Isaac seems to have assisted in all the affect- 
ing preparations for the proposed sacrifice. Then 
he is bound, and the mighty secret, which must 
have been suspected by himself and with difficulty 
was concealed by his father, is fully divulged. 
Isaac now knows that he is the destined victim. 
As noble as is Abraham's faith, so heroic and 
divine is Isaac's obedience; truly he also " was 
led as a lamb to the slaughter." We are grateful 
that the sacred historian has drawn a veil over 
this affecting scene ; we shall not rudely lift that 
veil ; we shall not coarsely describe this painful, 
solemn, and sublime event. We cannot but see 
illustrations of the unspeakable love of God and 
the unresisting obedience of the Lamb of God as 
the sacrifice for sinners. Abraham is thoroughly 
in earnest. With unhesitating promptness he 
stretches forth his hand to slay his son. We al- 
most shudder as we approach the terrible crisis, 
and nature shrinks back at the fearful spectacle. 
At this crucial moment the Angel of Jehovah 
interposes for Isaac's deliverance. In this fear- 
ful moment the awful mandate is countermanded. 
The title given to this divine messenger shows 
that he was not a created being, but a divine per- 



^3° OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

sonage, who often appears in the narrative under 
the title o\ Angel of Jehovah, or the Angel of the 

Covenant. 

Just then a substitute is found in the ram caught 
in the thicket by his horns; thus God provided 
Himself with a burnt-offering. We cannot help 
seeing here a foreshadowing of Christ, who was 
the true sacrifice, even from before the founda- 
tion of the world. Faith in God was the secret 
of Abraham's great triumph. There was danger 
lest he should trust in Isaac rather than in God to 
fulfil all of God's great promises. He now shows 
that his faith rested on the bare word of God as 
the ground of all his hope. Such an act of self- 
sacrifice is of the highest value. It teaches lessons 
of the utmost importance. It has proved a 
school of faith throughout all countries and cen- 
turies. From the terrible ordeal Abraham came 
forth like gold tried in the furnace. We may 
almost hear God addressing him in these sugges- 
tive words: 

"All thy vexations 

Were but my trials of thy love, and thou 

Hast strangely stood the test. " 

The Divine Approval of Faith. 

The voice from heaven declares that God does 
not accept human sacrifices. Man is rather a 
doomed culprit than an appointed victim. The 
intention was enough to show Abraham's faith, 
and that test had been conspicuously given by 



SHOULD ABRAHAM OFFER ISAAC? 231 

actual experiment. Abraham's voluntary sur- 
render was the keystone in the sublime arch of 
his faith, which still stands before the world giv- 
ing Abraham praise and God glory. God inter- 
posed at the right time. It has been well said, 
that if His interposition had been sooner, Abra- 
ham's faith would not have been fully tested; 
and had it been later, Isaac's life had not been 
saved. God accepted the will for the deed, the 
arresting voice being heard when the knife was 
ready to strike. The ram was then substituted 
for Isaac. Abraham rises here almost to a divine 
height, for in his intent he withheld not his only 
son, and yet in fact he offered a substitute. We 
may well see in Abraham's act a shadow of the 
love of God who spared not His only Son ; and in 
the substituted ram we see an emblem of Him 
who, as the Lamb of God, gave Himself as an 
offering for sinners. 

God's approval was shown in the new name 
given to the place — Jehovah-jireh, the Lord will 
provide, or will see. The name was thus changed 
from Moriah, which by interpretation meant " the 
land of vision," a name probably given from this 
event, in reference to the remarkable vision or 
manifestation of God which was there made, and 
to which fuller allusion is found in the new name 
Jehovah-jireh. There are many interpretations 
of both these names; the latter name is in some 
sense a proverb ; it declares that on the mount of 
Abraham's sacrifice Jehovah would afterward re- 



»3 a OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

veal a greater sacrifice for the salvation of His 
people. It clearly suggests that "man's extrem- 
ity is God's opportunity." This prophecy had 
many fulfilments and applications, but it was 
literally fulfilled in the manifestation of the di- 
vine glory in Solomon's temple, and later in the 
incarnation, death, resurrection, and ascension 
of Jesus Christ. Some believe that Calvary and 
Moriah were identical ; this we cannot affirm with 
certainty, but the lessons taught by both are sub- 
stantially similar. He who provided a ram has 
since provided the atoning Lamb, of whom this 
ram was a type. Thus it was that Abraham saw 
Christ's day and was glad. In the Mount, in the 
highest experience of trial, God will appear to 
deliver His saints. Abraham has now reached a 
great moral elevation; the angel of the Lord, 
therefore, confirms with great solemnity all the 
special promises already made. Abraham's off 
spring, instead of being cut off by the death of 
Isaac, will be as the stars of heaven and the sand 
of the seashore. He shall also have a great terri- 
tory and vast temporal power and influence. He 
takes his place at the head of the faithful and as 
a type of the justified. He shows that he deserves 
the twofold title, the father of the faithful and 
the friend of God. Thus it comes to pass that 
the lessons of Moriah and Calvary sweetly blend. 
East of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre a spot 
is pointed out with the idea of connecting the 
sacrifice of Isaac with the crucifixion of Christ. 



SHOULD ABRAHAM OFFER ISAAC? 2^ 

Just at hand there is an ancient thorn-tree, which 
is usually covered with the rags of pilgrims, and 
tradition affirms that it is the thicket in which the 
ram was caught. Some writers have gone so far 
as to see in the thorn-tree a shadow of the crown 
of thorns. We need not dwell upon these fanci- 
ful allusions, but we can rest securely upon the 
great fact that the deepest significance of this 
offering of Isaac is found in the sacrifice of Jesus. 

Additional Teachings. 

We may learn from this most interesting his- 
tory that trials are sure to come to the greatest 
as well as to the humblest of God's saints. All 
God's children must pass through deep waters; 
but God has promised that the waters shall not 
overflow them. They all must go into some 
fiercely heated furnace; but it is certain that a 
divine presence will be with them, so that the 
flames shall not consume even their garments. 
God has not promised to save His people from 
trial, but to make them victorious over trial. 
Sanctified trials separate the chaff from the wheat ; 
they consume the dross and so purify the gold. 
They develop character, ennoble life, and prepare 
for heaven. 

We see also in studying this narrative the 
blessedness of trusting God. It is evermore true 
that the time of greatest trial gives the opportunity 
for exercising the sweetest trust. Abraham would 
never know the blessedness of receiving Isaac as 



234 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

one raised from the dead had he not trusted God 
with unquestioning faith. Not until the summit 
of the mountain is reached can we behold the 
grandest display of God's glory. He who with- 
holds nothing from God will by a blessed experi- 
ence realize that God withholds nothing from him. 
We here behold with new beauty and radiant 
glory the true Lamb of God provided as an offer- 
ing for sin. Abraham may not have understood 
this great truth in all its fulness, but he certainly 
had some glimpses of the glory that was to be 
fully revealed. In some sense Isaac bound and 
laid upon the altar was a type of man's helpless- 
ness ; in another sense he was the type of Christ 
as the deliverer. All the sacrifices of the olden 
time pointed to Jesus as the Lamb of God, who 
taketh away the sin of the world. Past every 
type and shadow, past every symbol and offering, 
let us look away unto Jesus, the author and fin- 
isher of our faith. 



XIV. 

DID REBEKAH AND JACOB CHEAT ISAAC 
AND ROB ESAU? 



XIV. 

DID REBEKAH AND JACOB CHEAT 
ISAAC AND ROB ESAU? 

We now enter, in the twenty-seventh chapter 
of Genesis, upon the study of one of the most pic- 
turesque and pathetic stories in the Bible. It is 
a story which at one time makes the eye moist 
w T ith tenderness, and at another time makes the 
heart throb with indignation. But whether it ex- 
cites our praise or blame, it never fails to secure 
our interest. It attracts childhood and old age 
with equal force, and holds both with a resistless 
charm. The inspired historian tells the story 
fully and frankly, but without any comments of 
his own. A thoughtless reader might suppose 
that the sacred writer considered the conduct of 
Rebekah and Jacob to be simply a dexterous trick, 
not involving any great moral delinquency. But 
the later development of the story shows plainly 
how a just God punished the sins of all concerned; 
and we thus learn instructive lessons as to the 
baleful results of fraud and deceit. We see plainly 
that no one can oppose God and prosper. 



23 s OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES, 

Preparations for the Paternal Blessing. 

Isaac was now growing- old. He evidently had 
fallen into physical, mental, and spiritual feeble- 
ness. It is clear that Rebekah anticipated his 
speedy death, but he surprised her by living still 
for more than forty years. He did not seem to 
understand that in the purpose of God Jacob was 
heir to the promises. He seems to have been 
stricken with some sharp malady, as well as in- 
creasing blindness ; and, like most other men, he 
was unduly alarmed by his physical symptoms. 
Perhaps he had not fully learned of the command 
of God to Rebekah concerning her sons ; neither 
may he have known of the transference of the 
birthright of Esau to Jacob. He therefore makes 
arrangements for bestowing the paternal blessing 
on Esau; and so he called Esau to him — Esau 
bow luiggadol, " Esau his son the great" — mean- 
ing the greater or older of his sons. Notwith- 
standing Esau's undutiful conduct in marrying 
into the people of Canaan, his father still treated 
him with great and even culpable partiality. He 
directed Esau to take his weapons, kele, a word 
signifying implements or utensils of any kind; 
and it is probable that our English word weapon 
originally had this broad meaning, and was not 
limited to instruments of warfare. He instructs 
Esau to go out to the field and secure some veni- 
son. The expression in the original, as Dr. Bush 
has pointed out, is striking; Esau is to "hunt me 



ESAU'S BIR THRIGH T. 239 

a hunting," tzudah li tzayidah — that is, game of 
whatever kind. The result shows that a kid of 
the goats might have sufficed, but a cunning 
hunter like Esau would naturally prefer game to 
kids. The Orientals were and are fond of highly 
flavored and luxurious dishes, and this is implied 
in the Hebrew which we translate, " savory 
meat." The original is matammim, from a word 
meaning to taste. There is almost no end to the 
salts, spices, garlics, and onions of Oriental dishes ; 
thus sweet and sour, oil and acid, combine to 
mystify the dish and to enhance its value in the 
judgment of the Oriental palate. This Hebrew 
word means delicacies of any kind which would 
be grateful to the taste of Isaac, whose appetite, 
as the result of his illness, needed tempting. 
There is little doubt but that there was also a 
religious significance in the meal of which he 
desired to partake. It was probably part of a re- 
ligious solemnity ; it was in some sense a sacrifice 
offered by the recipient of the blessing, and thus 
it would be considered as a ratification of the pro- 
ceeding. Thus Jacob killed two kids of the goats, 
although one would have been sufficient for the 
meal. In addition to the religious idea involved, 
Isaac's spirits would be revived and his vigor in- 
creased by the delicacies, for the solemn work of 
bestowing the parental blessing. We thus see 
Isaac preparing to perform his part in discharg- 
ing the solemn obligations which belonged to his 
position. As Elisha demanded the influence of 



240 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

music before speaking the word of the Lord, so 
Isaac sought to secure the necessary physical 
vigor and inspiration for this great occasion. 

Rebekah's Wily Stratagem. 

Rebekah overheard Isaac giving his instruc- 
tions to Esau. She, doubtless, was greatly ex- 
cited. A crucial moment in the family history 
had arrived; a sad domestic drama is to be en- 
acted ; plotting and counter-plotting are to be the 
order of the hour. When Rebekah sees Isaac 
about to bestow the blessing on Esau, she deter- 
mines to trust her own skill and deceit rather than 
God's wisdom and purpose. Perhaps she thought 
she was justified in using deceit to forward God's 
plans; perhaps she saw no other way to prevent 
Isaac from thwarting the divine purpose; and 
perhaps there was a strange mingling of blamable 
maternal jealousy and commendable faith in the 
divine and prenatal oracle. It is possible that she 
did not clearly distinguish between the good and 
evil in her motives. She is a resourceful woman; 
she is master of the duplicity characteristic of her 
family. She braves the indignation of Isaac, the 
anger of Esau, and the displeasure of God. Her 
course was deplorably wicked; it ought never to 
have an apologist. It was an act of cruel deceit 
toward her husband, of great guilt toward Esau, 
and perhaps of even greater wrong toward Jacob; 
but it was most of all a signal offence against 
God. Her conduct has found apologists, but the 



ESA U % S BIRTHRIGHT. 241 

result showed that it never received the approval 
of God. She was equally weak and wicked in 
supposing that the fulfilment of God's promise 
required treachery on her part. Her policy was 
hopelessly crooked, and wholly at variance with 
the trustfulness and honesty of a true child of 
God. She distrusted God, and endeavored to 
accomplish His purpose by utterly unrighteous 
means. She is a proficient in the arts of dis- 
simulation ; she adopted the satanical and Jesui- 
tical maxim that the end justifies the means. 
She was impiously daring in commanding Jacob 
to obey her voice, and in her willingness to as- 
sume God's curse. One is startled at her words 
and acts. She loved Jacob unwisely ; she rightly 
recognized that he was the birthright son, and she 
also remembered Esau's reckless and contemp- 
tuous treatment of the privileges of the birthright ; 
but nothing could justify her in the wrongs she 
did. She was the cunning mother of a cunning, 
though cowardly, son. 

Progress of the Plot. 

Esau has now gone to the field to hunt for the 
venison ; the way is therefore clear in the home 
for the course of deception which Rebekah has 
determined to pursue. Jacob, in harmony with 
his timorous nature, views the matter more coolly 
than does his mother; he sees and rightly esti- 
mates the dangers in the way, but he is far more 

concerned that he may be safe than that he may 
16 



242 OLD TESTAMENT Dl SSICULTIES. 

be right ; he cares only for the risk, and not for 
the sin of the course proposed. He is not con- 
cerned with the enormity of his offence against 
God. He fears that he shall seem to his father as 
a deceiver, kimtataa, as one that causeth greatly 
to err, as a very deceiver. The original is most 
emphatic ; perhaps it includes the idea of despis- 
ing or mocking another. He may have no objec- 
tions to the imposition on his senile father or his 
open-hearted brother, but he is greatly alarmed 
lest he should be detected in his frauds, and so a 
curse and not a blessing should come upon him 
from his father. Rebekah might have gone to 
Isaac, if she found that he was determined to give 
the birthright to Esau, and might have urged him 
to follow the counsels of God. The temptation 
which came to her was in its essence that which 
came to our Lord in the wilderness, when Satan 
offered Him the kingdoms of the world if he would 
give Satan His homage ; it is the temptation which 
comes to all of us in every walk of life ; it is the 
temptation which we must resist with holy indig- 
nation, or before which we shall fall in hopeless 
subjection. 

Jacob's Acquiescence. 

Rebekah assured her son that she would take 
the curse upon herself. She ran a fearful risk in 
making such a declaration, and she thus mani- 
fested a low tone of moral sentiment. She could 
not take Jacob's curse, even if she would; only 



ESAU'S BIR TH RIGHT. 243 

the compassionate Saviour of sinners, who bore 
our sins in His own body on the tree, can take the 
curse upon Himself. Her words, perhaps, show 
great faith in the divine prediction, but they 
magnify rather than minify the fraud which she 
purposes to practise upon Isaac. 

It is simply astonishing that in the form of 
solemnization of matrimony in one of the prayer- 
books, a petition is offered that the man and 
woman entering into this sacred relationship 
should live together as did Isaac and Rebekah. 
Doubtless this petition is based upon the monog- 
amy characteristic of Isaac and Rebekah, as dis- 
tinguished from the polygamy of that day; but 
it is, to say the least, a most unfortunate prayer 
to be offered at the marriage ceremony. When 
one remembers the domestic drama in that an- 
cient family, and the painfully unwifely conduct 
of which Rebekah was guilty toward her invalid 
and blind husband, one would surely prefer some 
other prayer on such an occasion. Rebekah' s 
greater force of character entirely overcame 
Jacob's hesitancy. He goes to the flock and se- 
cures two kids of the goats, and Rebekah deter- 
mines that with all the witchery of her cookery 
she shall make Isaac believe that the delicacies 
which he desired are now prepared. She is thor- 
oughly master of the situation; and Jacob was 
both her tool and accomplice. She prepares 
goodly raiment, lialiamadoth, desirable garments, 
with which to impose further on her husband. 



244 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

She also will cover Jacob's hands and neck with 
the skins of the kids so as to make him appear the 
more like Esau. It is well understood that the 
Oriental camel goats, as they are called, furnish 
a wool that is soft and silky, and of a much finer 
texture than that of the European goat. This 
wool was often used as a substitute for human 
hair. Rebekah will leave nothing undone to 
carry out her plans. She could readily impose 
upon the dim sight and the dull touch of the blind 
invalid. 

A Dramatic Scene. 

The scene at this point is as striking as it is 
sad. It is difficult to surpass the spirit of decep- 
tion practised by Jacob at this point. The father 
wonders at the haste with w T hich Esau has re- 
turned ; he wonders, also, whether this can really 
be his son. And now Jacob deliberately and re- 
peatedly lies to his father, at this solemn hour 
and in connection with this solemn event. We 
must call things by their right names; we need 
not be more solicitous for the character of Jacob 
than is the Bible. Doubtless by some mental and 
spiritual legerdemain he justifies himself. Aug- 
ustine and others attempt to justify his conduct 
on the ground that lie already had purchased the 
birthright. We do not wish to criticise with undue 
severity a fallible man whom God designed greatly 
to honor; but none of the patriarchs can be taken 
as models for our conduct. They lived under a 



ESA U ' S BIR TH RIGHT. 245 

primitive and very imperfect code of morals. 
The Bible nowhere justifies the conduct of Jacob 
and Rebekah ; if the Bible had been written by 
uninspired men, this story had never been told. 
Uninspired writers often magnify and even create 
the virtues of their heroes; and they often minify 
and even deny the vices of their heroes. But 
while the Bible sets down naught in malice, it 
dares tell the truth and the whole truth. Jacob 
even went so far as to bring in God as sharing in 
the deception he had practised. He found the 
venison so soon " because the Lord thy God 
brought it to me." The original is here very 
striking, hikrah IcpJianai, made it to occur, or 
caused it to come before me. Jacob here uses 
language expressive of a special interposition of 
Providence on his behalf. But Isaac is not yet 
through with Jacob, and his falsehoods must be 
repeated. Isaac's ear denotes the difference of 
tone, although his eyes give no testimony. A 
thrill of alarm must have filled Jacob's soul as 
Isaac commands him to come near. Martin 
Luther strikingly says : " I should have probably 
run away with horror and let the dish fall. " Isaac 
feels the hairy skin, and it resembles Esau's; still 
he has a lurking doubt, .and in response to his 
question, Jacob affirms that he is his very son 
Esau. Had there been a failure at this point, 
the whole scheme would have failed, but Rebekah 
guarded against this danger. Jacob was after- 
ward the victim of the deceits which his sons 



?4 6 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES, 

practised upon him in connection with the coat of 
Joseph. 

True religion is not responsible for Jacob; it 
was the lack of true religion which made him de- 
ceitful. He had not yet passed through that ex- 
perience which we understand by conversion, 
but which was his at the brook Jabbok. True re- 
ligion was no more responsible for this act than 
it was for Paul when he persecuted the believers 
in Jesus. In Jacob we find the quiet patience 
of his father, and the grasping selfishness and 
unholy acquisitiveness so characteristic of his 
mother's family. It was diamond cut diamond 
when these two Hebrews, Laban and Jacob, were 
driving a bargain. We ought ever to remember 
that God's promises and purposes never necessi- 
tate, certainly never justify, fraud and falsehood 
on the part of men. God can accomplish all His 
purposes without wrong-doing on the part of His 
creatures. 

The Paternal Kiss. 

In verses 26 to 29 we see that the paternal kiss 
is given and the paternal benediction bestowed. 

One would think that the father's kiss would have 
burned the son's cheek. Isaac smelled the smell 
of Jacob's raiment. We know that often in blind 
men the sense of smell helps them to recognize 
objects. As Jacob was supposed to have returned 
from the field, it was expected that his garments 
would smell of the chase. It is still common in 



ESA U y S BIR TH RIGHT, 247 

many parts of the Orient to distinguish persons 
by smelling the crown of the head or other parts 
of the body ; of an amiable man it is often said : 
" How sweet is the smell of that man ; the smell 
of his goodness is universal. " Thus Isaac smelled 
and kissed him. The kiss was the sign of affec- 
tion, the token of friendship, and, in some sense, 
a symbol of homage. And while he kissed Jacob 
the odor of Esau's garments, impregnated by 
aromatic herbs, excited the sensibilities of the 
aged man and inspired him to pour forth his bene- 
diction. Jacob was to receive the fatness of the 
earth, the dew of heaven, the homage of nations, 
and to exercise lordship over his mother's sons. 

Esau's Return. 

A thrilling scene comes before us. Esau un- 
expectedly returns. Clandestinely Jacob had re- 
ceived the blessing. No wonder we read: " Isaac 
trembled very exceedingly." The painful illu- 
sion is dispelled, the abominable deception is dis- 
covered, and the guilt of wife and son is revealed. 
Isaac's emotions must have been absolutely over- 
whelming. A just indignation must have filled 
his soul. He must at the same time have been 
conscious of his own wrong in allowing his unwise 
love for Esau to lead him to disobey God. Years 
before, he was willing to trust God, even to laying 
himself upon the altar of sacrifice. But the bene- 
diction had been given, and it cannot be recalled. 
He now saw that it was God's purpose that the 



7 



248 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

blessing should continue in the line of Jacob rather 
than in that of Esau. Esau's grief is distressing; 
and we cannot but sympathize with him in his 
terrible disappointment, even though we blame 
him for despising his birthright. There is an 
obvious reference to Jacob's name when Esau 
said: " He hath supplanted — yakebani — me these 
two times." Jacob's name, yaakob, Esau here 
interprets, and it can not be denied that there 
was ground for these reflections upon Jacob the 
supplanter. But Isaac has a blessing for Esau 
also. With his name was long associated do- 
minion by the sword and great power among the 
people. To him a pastoral life is distasteful, as it 
was afterward with his race. The Edomites were 
long independent, but were conquered by David 
and others. Rebekah is obliged to urge her be- 
loved Jacob to flee to Laban, her brother, and 
there remain until Esau's wrath shall abate. She 
was the cause of much of the sorrow in her family, 
and she suffers retributive chastisements. She 
parts with Jacob, not to see him for twenty years, 
if ever after; and even in this parting with him 
she artfully plans so as to conceal from Isaac the 
worst features of the case. 

Lessons. 

We see by this ancient story the danger that 
men may sin even while seeking a worthy end. 
All the parties to this domestic tragedy sinned 
against one another and against God. Isaac 



ESA U ' S SIR THRIGHT. 249 

sinned by striving' to set aside the will of God, 
because of his unwise partiality toward Esau. 
Rebekah sinned by distrusting God, and by prac- 
tising abominable deceptions. She did evil that 
good might come. Her course was evil, and that 
continually. Jacob sinned in a most revolting- 
way, in the transaction by which he secured the 
birthright. 

He took a mean advantage of Esau's hunger, 
and robbed him of that which should have been 
dearer to Esau than life itself. He sinned in 
obeying his mother rather than God, and one sin 
led to another, until his falsehood became pro- 
fanity, making God a partner in his crime. Esau 
sinned in despising his birthright and also in his 
marital relations. We have no right ever to make 
God's supposed designs the rule of our conduct. 
God does not give us His prophecies as maxims 
for the government of our actions. We are 
simply to do right, even though the heavens 
should fall. Parents are in danger of cherishing 
an unwarranted partiality for sons or daughters, 
and against this tendency they must ever be 
watchful. 

We learn, also, that sin must evermore be pun- 
ished. Punishment followed according to the 
most natural laws all concerned in this guilty 
transaction. The best men and women are com- 
passed with infirmity ; sinless perfection does not 
belong to this life. The old Greek tragedies show 
us the close relation between crime and punish- 



-'5° OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

merit, between sin and sorrow ; they teach this 
lesson as truly as it is taught even in the Bible. 
In the end wicked schemes prove abortive; in the 
end the deceiver is himself deceived; "the engi- 
neer is hoist on his own petard." Jacob suffered 
from the cupidity of Laban, and afterward from 
the deception of his own sons. Terrible was the 
sorrow of Rebekah as she parts, probably forever, 
from her beloved Jacob. As the chief offender, 
she probably was the chief sufferer. Whatsoever 
we sow that shall we reap ; that is one of the most 
solemn statements in the whole Bible. As God 
lives, the man who sows the wind shall reap the 
whirlwind. Thank God! there is forgiveness 
with Him, if we but turn to Him in penitence and 
faith. 

We read that " Esau found no place of repent- 
ance, though he sought it carefully with tears." 
We must not suppose that Esau, wishing to re- 
pent, could not; the meaning clearly is that he 
sought for his father's repentance, in the sense of 
a change in his purpose ; but all his tears could 
not change that purpose. He sowed to the flesh, 
and he could not expect to reap the fruit of the 
spirit. We sympathize with him in his great and 
bitter cry, and in contrast with his dashing con- 
duct we stigmatize the mean cupidity and com- 
mercial sharpness of Jacob; but Esau's cry is 
simply that of one who did not heed God's warn- 
ing, and who despised God's gracious gifts. He 
threw away his blessing for a mess of pottage, 



ESA U'S BIRTHRIGHT. 251 

and he cannot now get it for a flood of tears. 
Happy are they who know the time of grace, and 
who do not despise the opportunity of mercy. 
Esau's tears are too late; he must reap as he 
sowed. We also have a great and glorious birth- 
right, and we also may lose it for some temporary 
pleasure. Adam and Eve sold theirs for a little 
fruit. God help us not to choose baubles for 
diamonds, earth for heaven, time for eternity, 
and self for Christ ! 



XV. 

WHO WAS THE WRESTLER WITH JACOB 
AT JABBOK ? 



XV. 

WHO WAS THE WRESTLER WITH 
JACOB AT JABBOK? 

In the 32c! chapter of Genesis we have an ac- 
count of the turning-point in the life of Jacob. 
We here see another wonderful event in the stir- 
ring career of this historic patriarch. Before this 
period we observed his cunning devices, his nu- 
merous artifices, and his intense selfism, growing 
out of a weak and defective faith. But after this 
period we shall notice his great humility, com- 
mendable resignation, and beautiful confidence as 
a child of God and a patriarch of Israel. The old 
Jacob, with his desire to supplant his brother and 
his uncle b) r his commercial shrewdness, disap- 
pears ; the new Jacob, who is now Israel, appears 
and remains ever afterward on the historic page. 
It required much sorrow, many trials, and severe 
chastisements to eliminate Jacob and to introduce 
Israel. All the previous events in his life were 
but the divine preparations for his change of heart 
and of name. Hitherto his conduct was that of a 
clever, self-reliant, and not over-scrupulous man; 
hitherto he has fought with the weapons of human 
shrewdness and unholy cunning. Now we are to 
see him relying on God and doing his duty as a 



256 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

follower of the holy One, and as the head of a 
great race. We are now to enter upon the period 
which marks his conversion, his regeneration, his 
consecration as a true servant of God. 

Preparing to Return. 

His departure from Canaan to Aram was marked 
by a crisis in his life ; so now is his return from 
Aram to Canaan marked by another and even 
greater crisis. We are told that on his way a 
vision of the heavenly host was granted to him ; 
we do not know just how this apparition of angels 
was made to Jacob. We are, however, fully to 
believe that these angels, malakim, messengers, 
were not merely human, but truly the angels of 
God. We may well believe that the occasion was 
sufficiently important to justify an angelic mani- 
festation. Jacob now has to pass through the 
land of Edom, which was in possession of his 
brother Esau. He also had every reason to be- 
lieve that Esau might be as hostile as he was 
powerful. God's angels thus came to quiet his 
fears and to strengthen his hopes. A glorious 
physical prospect is here before him ; fresh ver- 
dure and rich pasturage are about him, and as he 
enters the land the heavenly messengers give him 
greeting. He now sees that his late deliverance 
was due to God's providence, and that his future 
welfare is also under God's watchcare. Twenty 
years before when, fleeing from his angry brother, 
he had arrived at Bethel, the mystical ladder, 



WHO WAS THE WRESTLER WITH JACOB? 257 

reaching from earth to heaven, and upon it angels 
ascending and descending, he beheld ; and now, 
as he returns, angel hosts come to defend him 
should dangers arise. He rightly called the name 
of that place Mahanaim; this Hebrew word is a 
dual term implying two hosts or camps. Years 
before he saw the angelic messengers in a dream, 
but now he sees them when awake. He recog- 
nizes them as the messengers of God, and he 
names the place Mahanaim from the double host. 
This place has been identified with Mahneh, and 
the name was handed down to after ages as a place 
of sanctuary for the trans-Jordanic tribes. Jacob 
is still on the heights of the trans-Jordanic hills. 
These messengers do not seem to have given him 
any verbal communication, but he could readily 
infer the object of their mission and so become 
assured of God's protecting providence. This 
was truly a glorious vision which was granted 
Jacob at this crisis of his life. In Psalm xxxiv. 
7 we read, " the angel of the Lord encampeth 
round about them that fear him." The word 
angel in this passage without doubt means " an- 
gelry," the collective multitude of angels. Such 
a multitude we may well believe Jacob now saw. 
They surrounded his camp, and their presence 
and the events which there occurred have made 
the place historic and even immortal. He is by 
the brook Jabbok, a word which probably means 
"pouring out," or "flowing forth," or it may be 
connecter! with the word in verse 24, rendered 
17 



25S OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

"wrestled." It is now the Zerka, a perennial 
stream which flows into the Jordan, between the 
sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea, after a westerly 
course of about sixty miles. Penuel, where Jacob 
wrestled with the angel, was a fording-place of 
this brook. This stream divided the territory of 
Og from that of Sihon, and it flowed through the 
region afterward assigned to the tribe of Gad. 

Sending Messages to Esau. 

Verses 3 to 9 give us the account of the mes- 
sage sent to Esau informing him of Jacob's ar- 
rival. We now, again, have the word malakint as 
in the first verse of the chapter, but now refer- 
ring to human and not divine messengers. This 
mission was obviously a very wise precaution, for 
Jacob fears the wrath of his justly incensed 
brother. Jacob is ever skilful, cautious, and 
crafty ; he knew something of the temper of his 
brother, and he now knows also something of hi 
great power. We do not know why or when Esau 
had removed to the land of Seir. This was Arabia 
Petrca on the east and south of the Dead Sea, and 
inhabited originally by the Horites, or " troglo- 
5," who excavated the singular rock-dwell- 
ings found in the vicinity of Petra; this was a 
place with which Esau had become connected by 
marriage with a daughter of Ishmael. Probably 
the gradual enlargement of his domestic establish- 
ment and the unfilial deportment of his wives 
made it fitting that he should not live near his 



WHO WAS THE WRESTLER WITH JACOB? 259 

parents; we may also believe that there was a 
divine purpose in his departure from the land of 
promise, thus making room for his brother, its 
divinely appointed possessor. Esau thus acted 
with the utmost freedom, and yet he was fulfill- 
ing the divine purpose in the course he adopted. 
He had a force of four hundred men with him, 
and this is a truly formidable company of depen- 
dents. He has begun to live by the sword; and, 
being associated by marriage with Hittites and 
Ishmaelites, he has become a powerful sheik. 
What was his purpose in thus approaching Jacob? 
Perhaps he generally travelled with a large escort ; 
perhaps he is not openly hostile to his brother, 
but is just in that state of mind when a slight word 
or act may inflame his wrath. 

Jacob approaches him with marked respect and 
deference ; his instructions to the messengers are 
conciliatory in the extreme. He does not avail 
himself of the honor of precedency as given in 
the paternal blessing, but he calls Esau his lord 
and speaks of himself as " thy servant. " He takes 
great pains to suggest — a very important matter, 
doubtless, to both — that he does not come in pov- 
erty asking help, but in wealth, and so is able to 
bestow favors. He wishes Esau to know that he 
has not come to claim "the double portion," and 
this statement would certainly tend greatly to 
conciliate Esau. Doubtless it was a time of great 
anxiety to Jacob; we are told that he was "dis- 
tressed," yct.zcr, straitened — this term implies that 



l6o OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

the distress of Jacob was very real; and, without 
doubt, God intended thereby to quicken His ser- 
vant's fervency in prayer, and to lead him to cast 
himself unreservedly upon divine help. We now 
see Jacob exercising the utmost precaution as he 
divides his flecks, herds, and camels into two 
bands ; he has determined to prepare himself for 
the worst while he trusts for the best. If Esau 
should smite one band the other may escape by 
flight. We ought not to blame him for taking 
these precautions; we ought not to say that he 
ought to trust God without adopting wise meas- 
ures to help himself. His prudence was as com- 
mendable as it was considerable ; and he can the 
more truly trust God after he has wisely helped 
himself. We see also that he manifested the ut- 
most skill by placing spaces between the droves 
of cattle. He would thus make the number ap- 
pear as large as possible, as do the adroit man- 
agers of political processions in our own day. He 
wished Esau properly to estimate the value of the 
gift. The announcement of the gift to Esau and 
the expressions of his regard for his brother are 
repeated in the most artful manner possible. It 
is asserted that Jacob is Esau's servant, and " be- 
hold thy servant Jacob is behind us." Jacob 
makes sure that nothing shall be neglected which 
shall appease Esau. Truly Jacob was a Hebrew 
of rare wisdom, skill, and foresight. These quali- 
ties would give him great success to-day in 
America; he would doubtless take high rank 



WHO WAS THE WRESTLER WITH JACOB? 261 

among his fellow Hebrews amid the exciting com- 
petitions of our day. Our thoughts turn for the 
moment from Jacob thus making careful prepara- 
tion, to his open-hearted brother approaching 
him with his large escort. Probably Esau had an 
almost pardonable vanity in showing Jacob how 
powerful he had become ; possibly, also, he wished 
to protect him from danger on the journey. Esau 
was always dashing, startling, and chivalrous. 
There was a decidedly spectacular, and a some- 
what Napoleonic, element in his character, an 
element which ahnost, in spite of our better judg- 
ment, wins our undue admiration. This is the 
picture of the two brothers. One is planning on 
the banks of the Jabbok to appease his brother, 
while that brother approaches him with a power- 
ful company of retainers. 

Prayer Following Effort. 

Jacob now prays as well as plans for deliver- 
ance. He not only uses all his own skill, but he 
seeks help from God. We have here really a re- 
markably fine model for a special prayer to God; 
this is one of the best, as it is one of the most an- 
cient, intercessions with God which we have in 
the Bible. This successful prayer deserves par- 
ticular notice. Jacob approaches God pleading his 
promises for the protection of his people. He lays 
hold of God's faithfulness as a God in covenant 
with his people ; and thus he appeals to God as his 
own God in covenant with Abraham and Isaac. He 



26a OLD TESTAMENT DLEELCULTLES. 

also lavs claim to personal mercies and promises. 
Most beautifully also does he manifest a spirit of 
deep humility and self-abasement; the prayer is 
literally steeped in humility ; and yet it is as urgent 
as it is humble. He does not forget in his pleas 
for deliverance his own unworthiness and God's 
greatness and holiness. It would be difficult to 
emphasize unduly the excellence of the spirit 
which he here manifests. He frankly confesses 
his sin and invokes God's mercy as an unmerited 
boon while he prostrates himself in the dust at 
God's feet; then he earnestly prays for deliver- 
ance, making tender reference to " the mother 
with the children." He identifies himself thus 
with the entire company, as he was its leader and 
head. He then pleads God's promise that He 
would grant him prosperity and crown him with 
blessing. We have often thought of Jacob, as he 
has been perhaps unkindly called, as " the father 
of Jewish guile"; that element, doubtless, was in 
his nature, but we ought not to forget that he was 
a faithful lover and a tender father, and that he is 
now to rise to be a majestic man of faith, and to 
have his name written with honor upon the im- 
perishable pages of sacred story. Thankfulness 
was one of the striking characteristics of his faith 
and his prayer. He traced all his success to 
God's loving care and gracious providence. We 
thus see him alone engaged in communion with 
God on the bank of the Jabbok. 



WHO WAS THE WRESTLER WITH JACOB? 263 

The Mysterious Wrestler. 

Jacob is thus alone, as all the others of nis com- 
pany have passed over. We now approach the 
crisis of the crisis in his life. God has marvellous 
honors in store for him, and he must b3 prepared 
for their reception. He is to have a new name 
. and a new nature 1 he is to be made worthy of his 
great place in the Kingdom of God. He has 
hitherto been a very unsaintly saint; but he is 
now entering upon a new life and a new conse- 
cration to God. Old things are passing away and 
all things are becoming new. Hitherto he has 
been self-reliant, self-righteous, self-seeking ; thus 
he bargained and plotted for the birthright ; thus 
he bargained with God at Bethel ; thus he higgled 
with Laban, cheating and being cheated. Just at 
this crisis, when, perhaps, he had passed over the 
ford and was seeking a little rest, a strange Being 
wrestles with him. The word wrestled, yeabek, 
a term occurring only here, is perhaps derived 
from abak, dust. It is supposed by some authori- 
ties to be applied to wrestling because of the dust 
which was excited by the exertions of the wres- 
tlers. The combatants in the Grecian games were 
glad literally to raise the dust, because thereby 
they could grasp more firmly the naked bodies of 
their opponents, which were besmeared with oil. 
Jacob is still true to his old nature, which has not 
yet fully passed away ; he will fight it out on the 
line of self-confidence if it take all night to reach 



264 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

a conclusion. He has been a taker-by-the-heel, a 
supplanter, all through his life; and, true to his 
character, he closes in with this great Unknown. 
But this mysterious One touches the socket of his 
hip-joint, and immediately it is w T renched out of 
joint. The thigh is the pillar of the wrestler's 
strength, and now Jacob is absolutely helpless, he 
can only hang in his helplessness on his con- 
queror, and thus he will sweetly learn that when 
he is weak he is strong. He clings to his con- 
queror and begs for a blessing. His action at this 
point is profoundly suggestive in its spiritual in- 
struction. Jacob is in the mighty hand of his 
almighty Vanquisher, who will overthrow the 
self -trustful Jacob, but w r ho will not deny the 
prayer of the helpless and trustful supplicant. 
We know from other Scripture, Hosea xii. 4, that 
he wept and made supplication, throwing himself 
in importunate prayer upon the mercy of God. 

Who was this mysterious wrestler? He does 
not give his name to Jacob, but he changes 
Jacob's name to Israel. In the passage before us 
the mysterious One is termed a man, but in 
Hosea xii. 4 he is called "the Angel"; this refer- 
ence clearly shows us that he was not a human 
antagonist. In verse 30 he is virtually called God 
in connection with the name of the place Peniel. 
Thus he who is at one. time called "a man" and 
" the Angel" is afterward designated by the august 
title of God. There is not the slightest doubt but 
that this mysterious wrestler was none other than 



WHO WAS THE WRESTLER WITH JACOB? 265 

the Angel of the Covenant, none other than the 
Son of God, none other than Jesus the Christ. 
No longer is the patriarch to be Jacob the sup- 
planter, but Israel, a prince and a prevailer with 
God. Jacob is no match in a contest with God as 
a wrestler, but as a suppliant he prevailed. The 
new name and the new nature go together. Jacob 
needed both, and Jacob now received both. He 
has now learned that the contest with Esau was 
nothing, but the contest with Jehovah was every- 
thing. Hitherto he had been a clever and perti- 
nacious man ; henceforth he is to be the humble 
suppliant, the devout believer, and the faithful 
servant. The transaction was profoundly real in 
Jacob's experience, and was symbolic of Jacob's 
past, present, and future. 

The Face of God. 

The word Peniel means "the face of God." 
Jacob so named the place because he had seen 
God face to face, " rait hi Elohim panim el panim" 
(" I have seen the Elohim faces to faces"), had 
vseen him fully and completely, and still lived. 
He carried ever after the marks of this conflict, 
for we are told that "he halted upon his thigh." 
When the Apostle Paul, in the abundance of his 
revelations, was exalted to the third heaven, he 
received a thorn in the flesh to humble him ; so 
Jacob received, perhaps, in the sciatic nerve, " the 
tendo Achillis of the Greeks," a token for a like 
purpose which he should carry with hi in to his 



266 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

grave. The Jews to this day abstain religiously 
from eating of the sinew which shrank, or became 
feeble, a eustom which is a monument to the his- 
torical truth of this remarkable event in the life 
ot Jacob. 

All true Christians have their remarkable spir- 
itual experiences. The artist has his times of 
glowing* enthusiasm and of almost superhuman 
inspiration, historians and artists love to visit 
plaees historic in their respective departments of 
genius. The man of letters lingers with fondest 
enthusiasm on moments of history and art in the 
world's great historic and artistic capitals. The 
Christian has his Bethlehems and Gethsemanes 
and Olivets. All along life's pathway he has his 
Peniels, times and places when the glory of God 
shines upon him and the peace of God fills his 
soul. Peniel may be found in secret prayer, in 
sacred communion, in the study of the Bible, or 
in the assembly of God's people. Happy are they 
who know these experiences which are foretastes 
of heaven itself. We may yet see God in the face 
of Jesus Christ and thus find our true life. He 
who walked in the garden in the cool of the day, 
who guided Noah, who visited Abraham, who 
delivered Lot, came finally as the Son of Man to 
dwell with men. The same mysterious One pro- 
nounced the word " Mary," as this devoted woman 
wept at His sepulchre. It was He who walked 
with the two disciples on the way to Emmaus. 
It is lie who walks and talks with His children to 



WHO WAS THE WRESTLER WITH JACOB? 267 

this blessed hour. It is well for vis when we re- 
ceive some wonderful honor from God, to receive 
also some memento of humility lest we be unduly 
elated by our spiritual exaltation. As men heard 
Jacob's new name and saw his lameness they 
would be reminded of the spiritual honor which 
he had received. May our humility ever testify 
to the reality of our communion with a risen and 
exalted Christ! 

Great trials are necessary to the purification of 
our faith. But for Jacob's utter helplessness he 
had never become the prevailer with God. When 
trials are sanctified they are the richest proofs 
of God's fatherly love. Let us not hesitate to 
go into the furnace, if only the Son of God go 
with us. 

He who prevails with God can never be over- 
come by men. Success in life must depend, as 
its deepest source, upon the favor of God. What 
is the mightiest power of our adversaries com- 
pared with the almighty power of our God? The 
might and the wisdom of man are weakness and 
foolishness with God. Christ's real triumph was 
in Gethsemane ; our greatest triumphs are to be 
in our closets. If we be victorious there, men will 
not be victorious over us in the public walks of life. 
We pray too little. Let us wrestle in fervent 
prayer with God and we shall never be vanquished 
by men. The man who fears God so much that 
he has no fear of men will triumph over every foe. 
If we be wrestling Jacobs we shall become pre- 



268 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

vailing Israels. Never was a more glorious night 
than that of Jacob's on the bank of Jabbok. As 
the morning dawns the unknown wrestler disap- 
pears and the triumph of Jacob is complete. 
Esau, as the impulsive hunter, passes away. But 
Jacob, purified by trial and cleansed by grace, 
transformed from the supplanter into the prince 
of God, still stands before the world crowned with 
glory and honor. Let us not be weary in our sup- 
plications. Upon us, as upon him, the Sun of 
righteousness will rise with healing in his beams 
and undimmed glory in His rays, and we, too, 
shall be transformed from supplanting Jacobs into 
prevailing Israels. 



XVI. 

DID GOD OR PHARAOH HARDEN PHARAOH'S 
HEART ? 



XVI. 

DID GOD OR PHARAOH HARDEN 
PHARAOH'S HEART? 

Few subjects in biblical interpretation have 
given rise to greater controversies and more con- 
flicting opinions than the hardening of Pharaoh's 
heart. This subject has greatly perplexed the de- 
voutest believers, and it has given infidels of 
ever)' class supposed materials for criticism of 
God and His holy Word. If we understand the 
subject rightly, we shall clearly see that neither 
God nor his Word needs apology on the part of 
any class of believers. This discourse is in no 
technical sense a theodicy; theodicean allevia- 
tions of this difficult narrative are not really 
necessary if only our interpretation be correct, if 
only it be truly biblical. If professional inter- 
preters and all readers would only look at the en- 
tire narrative concerning the hardening of Pha- 
raoh's heart in the light of common sense, of daily 
experience and observation, and especially in the 
light of a fair interpretation, instead of through 
the medium of traditional conceptions and un- 
authoritative creeds, they would have no difficulty 
in discovering the truth without any intermixture 
of error. Such an interpretation of God's Word 



272 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

will clearly show that God was no more respon- 
sible for the hardening of Pharaoh's heart than He 
is to-day for the hardening of the hearts of all 
men who shut their eyes to the light of His Word, 
and who sear their consciences against the influ- 
ence of His Spirit. 

It will be readily admitted that there are things 
hard to understand in the statements made con- 
cerning Pharaoh ; there are also facts difficult of 
explanation in every man's resistance to the 
claims of God upon his mind and heart. Unfor- 
tunately, the Scripture narrative respecting the 
Egyptian king has been so interpreted as to cause 
many to stumble thereat, and others to become 
fierce opponents of God's way and Word. But it 
is absolutely certain that a correct understanding 
of the narrative will greatly lessen the inherent 
difficulties of the case, and will bring God's treat- 
ment of this proud and stubborn king into line 
with the laws which govern men to-day in their 
rejection of truth, and in their refusal to do justly 
toward God and men, and into line also with the 
natural and inevitable effect of such conduct on 
their hearts and wills. In speaking of the harden- 
ing of Pharaoh's heart, the Bible simply states 
facts and suggests processes which we are daily 
witnessing among men now, as in the case of 
Pharaoh in that ancient day and remote land. A 
careful study of the texts in which reference is 
made to the hardening of Pharaoh's heart will 
show that there was no other influence at work 



DID GOD HARDEN PHARAOH'S HEART? 273 

than that which proceeded from his own deter- 
mination not to lose the services of the Israelites 
by obeying God in letting them go, as God 
through Moses had commanded; and that there 
was no other control over his heart than the action 
of laws still operant on the hearts of men who re- 
fuse to obey God, and whose hearts become hard- 
ened by the rejection of the Holy Spirit even to 
this hour. We are still taught to command men 
not to refuse to hear God's voice; and we are still 
taught that by refusing to obey they harden their 
hearts as truly as Pharaoh hardened his. 

Prophecy of the Hardening. 

When we turn to Exodus iv. 21, we learn that 
before Moses had returned to Egypt God had de- 
clared of Pharaoh, " I will harden his heart, that 
he shall not let the people go." At first blush 
these words surprise us, and suggest that God, by 
an act of arbitrary and sovereign power, had 
made it impossible for Pharaoh to obey the divine 
command given by Moses. We must, however, 
remember the purpose for which this statement 
was made to Moses. It was needful that he 
should be strongly impressed with God's provi- 
dence in all the events which were to occur; thus 
the result in regard to Pharaoh is stated at the 
outset for the encouragement of Moses. This 
statement was not so much causative as it was 
predictive. This statement of God resulted from 

His omniscience, He thereby knowing what would 
18 



2 74 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

be true in regard to Pharaoh, rather than from 
God's omnipotence, he thereby being able to 
cause this result to be true. The purpose of the 
statement was to prepare Moses for the final re- 
sult lest he should become discouraged upon a 
first and second failure, and should renounce the 
solemn mission upon which he had been sent by 
God. He is prepared for Pharaoh's repeated re- 
fusals, and for the dread ultimatum which finally 
he will announce to Pharaoh. Moses is to under- 
stand that the heart of Pharaoh and of all kings is 
in the hand of the Almighty who sent him upon 
this mission. 

It is important at this point that we should care- 
fully observe that the Bible, in speaking of the 
hardening of Pharaoh's heart, employs in the 
Hebrew original three distinct words differing 
in meaning from one another, but which, unfor- 
tunately, are all in the common version of the 
Scriptures indiscriminately rendered " hardened." 
It may be permitted, even in a popular discourse, 
to explain the diversity of the import of these 
words. In Exodus iv. 21, the passage already 
quoted, we have the expression chazzek eth libbo, 
" I will strengthen his heart." The Hebrew word 
hazak, which our version translates harden, liter- 
ally signifies to strengthen, confirm, embolden, 
make courageous; it is translated by such words 
as to excite to duty, to be strong, to persevere. 
It is placed by Hebrew compilers at the end of 
some of the books in the Bible to encourage 



DID GOD HARDEN PHARAOH'S HEART? 275 

readers to proceed with their study of the sacred 
writings, and to render the obedience which they 
require. It is a part of the exhortation of God to 
Joshua, Joshua i. 7, rak cliazak, "only be thou 
strong." It is also found in Joshua's dying ex- 
hortation to the people (xxiii. 6) ve-chazaktem, 
"be ye therefore very courageous," etc. No one 
would think of translating the original in these 
cases by the word "harden"; perhaps, indeed, the 
word "hardy" would not be inappropriate to the 
meaning of the passage before us and its context. 
If we carried over this meaning to God's words to 
Moses concerning Pharaoh in the passage under 
consideration, the thought would simply be, " I 
will make Pharaoh's heart daring, presumptuous, 
hardy" ; the principle which acts in harmony with 
God's holy law, and which is rightly termed cour- 
ageous, becomes presumptuous, dangerous, and 
defiant when it is opposed to God's will as revealed 
in His Word. Another one of the three words 
which is used to describe the condition of Phara- 
oh's heart is kabad, this means "to make heavy"; 
and the third word is kasliali, meaning " to make 
hard" in the sense of difficult, intractable, immov- 
able, stiff, or rigid. We thus see that these three 
original w r ords differ considerably from one an- 
other in their primary significance. When, for 
the second time, God says (Exodus vii. 3), " I will 
harden Pharaoh's heart," the announcement was 
made to Moses just before the beginning of the 
ten plagues. Moses is thus informed that the 



276 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

course which God would pursue with regard to 
Pharaoh would harden, and not soften, his heart, 
would simply make him more obstinate in his re- 
fusal that Israel should not go. The result of this 
process on the part of Pharaoh would make it 
necessary that Moses should make before the 
Egyptians still greater exhibitions of the divine 
might and majesty. The purpose of this an- 
nouncement to Moses, as before, was to assure 
him that in assuming these enormously difficult 
tasks God was with him, and would overrule all 
things for the deliverance of his people. In these 
statements regarding the process of petrification 
of the heart of Pharaoh the statement by God is 
again predictive rather than causative. The whole 
purpose, at this point, is to strengthen the faith, 
quiet the fears, and multiply the hopes of Moses 
by the assurance of God's presence in the vast 
undertaking commanded by God and assumed by 
Moses. When God is spoken of as hardening the 
heart of Pharaoh, the language simply implies 
that without the exertion of any positive divine 
influence Pharaoh should so treat God's command 
as inevitably, by the operation of perfectly natural 
laws, to confirm, to strengthen, and to harden 
himself in his opposition to God. Instead of be- 
ing humbled by the wonderful displays of divine 
power, he should be, by his resistance of light and 
by his wilful opposition to truth, the more de- 
termined in his opposition to the mandate of 
Jehovah. God is said to have done this simply 



DID GOD HARDEX PHARAOH'S HEART? 277 

because He permitted it ; in no other sense can it 
be said that He was the author of this hardening. 
In some sense, as Augustine long ago suggested, 
God may be said to harden those whom He re- 
fuses to soften. If men will not walk in the light 
that God gives them, they become blind ; if they 
will not listen to God's call, they repel God. 
Nowhere does God, by an exercise of arbitrary 
power, make it impossible for men to see the 
light, to walk in the truth, and to believe the 
right. When men grieve God's spirit, that spirit 
withdraws from them, and they are thus left to 
the consequence of their own wilful and sinful 
act. In Deut. ii. 30, language is applied to Sihon, 
King of Heshbon, similar to that here used with 
reference to Pharaoh, and in both cases we have 
simply the statement of the result of the disobedi- 
ence of these two men to the plain commands of 
God. In Joshua xi. 20, like terms are employed 
of the enemies of God. They had sinned against 
the light they had received, and God justly left 
them to the pride and obstinacy of their own 
wicked hearts. They chose to retain their idol- 
atry, and God permitted them to be destroyed. 
Similar sad experiences are being enacted in the 
history of every congregation, and in the lives 
of thousands of men to this very hour. We 
have in the Bible the statement of the operation 
of these laws; we have all around us to-day the 
operation of these laws, and if we had its inspired 
history, the language of the Bible regarding 



278 OLD TESTAMENTS DIFFICULTIES. 

Pharaoh would be repeated to-day regarding 
tens of thousands who hear and who reject the 
gospel of salvation. In the Bible we have a flash 
from the X-ray of divine truth; that truth is still 
operant, but we do not see its processes. Any 
one who will take the pains to examine the use of 
these Hebrew words in other parts of the Bible 
will see that they are employed with different 
shades of meaning, as suggested in this discourse ; 
and he will see that there is a solemn personal 
danger which still warrants the solemn exhorta- 
tion of the Psalmist (Ps. xcv. 8), " Harden not 
your heart." This hardening is here spoken of 
as a voluntary act on the part of those who reject 
God's Word, an act for which certainly God can- 
not be responsible, except He should deprive men 
of the freedom which is the inalienable right and 
great glory of manhood. 

Pharaoh's Responsibility. 

Attention frequently has been called to the fact 
that while in the narrative in Exodus the harden- 
ing of Pharaoh's heart is ten times ascribed, in 
the sense now explained, to the Lord, it is also 
several times ascribed to Pharaoh himself (Exodus 
viii. 15, 32; ix. 34); it is also several times stated 
that his heart was hardened, without naming the 
author of the process. We can readily see that 
the fact when ascribed to God, and then to Pha- 
raoh, is so ascribed in different senses of the word, 
so that there is no contradiction between the two 



DID GOD HARDEN PHARAOH'S HEART? 279 

assertions. It can be ascribed to God only in one 
of two senses : first, in that He permits it to occur ; 
or, second, in the sense that He is the Designee 
Creator, and Supreme Governor of the entire uni- 
verse, and that the acts of all His creatures may, in 
some sense, be carried back to Him, either as per- 
mitting or causing their occurrence. In the early 
day God was so constantly thought of as present 
and active in the government of the world and the 
control of men that it was natural to refer to Him 
as the author of all events of whatever kind. But 
in no respect was God the author of Pharaoh's 
sin ; in no respect is He the author of the sins of 
men to-day. God does not interfere with the 
freedom with which men are endowed ; if He did 
so interfere there could be, on the part of men, 
neither right nor wrong, neither virtue nor vice, 
neither personal sinfulness nor holiness. It is un- 
fortunte that in our common version only the 
word " harden" is used to translate the three dif- 
ferent Hebrew terms now given and explained ; 
had their various shades of meaning been prop- 
erly expressed in English many of the difficulties 
which have arisen would be unknown. The same 
three terms are used when the hardening is as- 
cribed to God as when it is ascribed to Pharaoh, 
or when its author is not distinctly stated. 

The Progress of the Hardening. 
Pharaoh resisted the reasonable demands of 
Moses for the deliverance of the people, notwith- 



2$o OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

standing all the wonderful signs which Moses had 
given him. The hand of God became more and 
more clearly revealed; finally Pharaoh confessed 
his wrong. His magicians could, in a measure, 
convert the rod into a serpent; still they must 
have felt Aaron's superiority as his rod swallowed 
up their rods. Before the ten plagues the heart 
of Pharaoh was hardened ; and after each of the 
first five plagues the hardening is expressly attrib- 
uted to Pharaoh himself, or is named without 
specifying the author (vii. 22; viii. 15, 19, 32; ix. 
7). After the sixth plague, Pharaoh still resist- 
ing, we read for the first time (ix. 12) that "The 
Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh." This 
word really means that " the Lord made firm the 
heart of Pharaoh ; the Hebrew is yehazzek. Space 
for repentance was then given Pharaoh, for after 
the seventh plague we read (ix. 34) that Pharaoh 
" made heavy his heart. " The third plague utterly 
overmatched the skill of Pharaoh's magicians; 
they owned their powerlessness, and confessed 
the presence of the finger of God. After the fifth 
plague Pharaoh discovered that not one of the 
cattle of the Israelites was dead. This difference 
between the Israelites and Egyptians ought to 
have removed Pharaoh's last doubt. It did pro- 
duce a marked impression on the minds of some 
of the Egyptians, and when the seventh plague 
was announced, they took steps to protect their 
cattle against the predicted storm of hail and fire. 
After this plague Pharaoh owned his sin, ac- 



DID GOD HARD EX PHARAOH'S HEART? 281 

knowledged the righteousness of God and the 
wickedness of himself and his people (ix. 27) ; but 
when the severity of the plague was over he hard- 
ened his heart again (ix. 1^). The sun of pros- 

• 
perity once more shone forth ; and, as the natural 

sun hardens the clay that had been saturated by 
rain, so Pharaoh's heart was hardened by the re- 
moval of the plague and the occurrence of the 
respite. He was thus preparing himself and his 
people for the final catastrophe. He was, by his 
own voluntary, deliberate, personal, and wicked 
acts, fitting his heart for the judicial and divine 
hardening as the natural and inevitable result of 
the laws of freedom with which he and we are 
endowed. The progress of evil in the human soul 
is one of the most solemn facts in human exist- 
ence. Men who will not use their limbs will one 
day find that they are virtually unusable; men 
who will not exercise their memories practically 
lose their memories ; men who will not speak and 
pray in religious services will largely lose the 
power of speech and prayer. A species of eyeless 
fish is found in dark caves; having no use for 
eyes, they soon have no eyes to use. These are 
tremendously solemn realities in the experiences 
of men to-day as well as in the judicial judgment 
on Pharaoh. These great moral laws sweep 
through the universe; they are irresistible as 
gravitation and universal as God. No one can es- 
cape their operation. If we come into line with 
them, they will help us in the development of 



282 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

character for useful lives on earth and for admis- 
sion into heaven ; if we oppose them, they will, by 
all the might of infinity, utterly destroy us. 

Human Disobedience and Divine Hardening. 

Let us bear in mind that the words referring to 
God's agency in the process of Pharaoh's harden- 
ing were for the encouragement of Moses, and 
that the words referring to his own action show 
his determination to resist God. The wonders 
and signs performed by God through Moses acting 
on a better man with a better heart would have 
secured obedience; but acting on Pharaoh with 
his haughty heart, cruel nature, and mistaken no- 
tions of political economy, simply produced hard- 
ness and rebellion amounting to moral insanity. 
But for his sullen obstinacy, his determined dis- 
obedience, and his wilful blindness, his heart had 
never been hardened; the responsibility of this 
hardness, therefore, rests with him, and not with 
God. The same sun hardens clay and softens 
wax. Do we blame the sun because the clay is 
hardened? The differences between the two re- 
sults in the clay and the wax are due to the dif- 
ferences between the two substances, and not to 
the sun, although it apparently produced these 
opposite effects. God's providences were by 
Pharaoh's disobedience the occasion of his hard- 
ening ; but his own stubborn will and wicked heart 
were the cause of his hardening. God did not 
purpose the hardening, in the sense of causing it; 



DID GOD HA RDEN PHA RAOH'S HE A RT? 283 

God permitted it, in the sense of letting natural 
forces and wholesome laws bring about their usual 
and inevitable result. God uniformly performs 
good; God may occasionally permit evil. Men 
may, in the exercise of their God-given freedom, 
so misuse God's good gifts that they result in evil, 
and not in good, so far as the will of man is con- 
cerned. 

Let us thus clearly understand that God's 
announcement to Moses of the hardening of 
Pharaoh's heart was not causative, but simply 
predictive. The fulfillment of the prediction was 
suspended to give Pharaoh an opportunity to turn 
to God in penitence, and to the enslaved people in 
justice. We have seen that five plagues occurred, 
and still Pharaoh resisted all these remarkable 
proofs of the divine presence and power; and not 
until then was the divine prediction against him 
fulfilled. God restrained His punishment until 
the cup of Pharaoh's guilt was full. Pharaoh 
hardened his own heart in determined sin before 
God hardened it in righteous punishment. Pha- 
raoh was by his own will an obstinate, impenitent, 
and abominable sinner, before God by His sover- 
eign permission allowed him to be judicially, in 
harmony with the law of his own conduct, a 
doomed reprobate. 

Practical Applications. 

These great truths have their practical applica- 
tions in the lives of men to-day. The Bible 



284 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES, 

simply declared the process of hardening- in the 
heart of Pharaoh; but a similar process is taking 
place to-day in the hearts of thousands who listen 
to the gospel of Christ. If God should fully write 
the history of many in our congregations, it could 
be said of them, as truly as of Pharaoh, that they 
hardened their own hearts in their guilt, and that 
God permitted this hardening in their guilt, and 
also that God permitted this hardening in punish- 
ment for their wicked unbelief. We know that 
in the exercise of their freedom men now resist, 
despise, and oppose God ; out of this conscious, ob- 
stinate, and determined resistance comes hardness 
of heart. The moment a man knowingly and will- 
ingly disobeys God, that moment the process of 
hardening begins. God's calls are numerous, 
tender, and varied. As truly as did Pharaoh 
harden his heart, so do men harden their hearts 
at this hour. Their act is voluntary ; it is charge- 
able to themselves, and not to God. In God's 
name you are exhorted to-day, " harden not your 
hearts as in the provocation." 

The Gospel never leaves men as it finds them ; 
it must either harden or soften. It must either 
be a savor of life unto life, or of death unto 
death ; and the savor which is life to one, or death 
to another, is according to the manner in which 
the Gopsel is received. It is never the intention 
of God that the Gospel should bring death ; but, 
like every blessing which is rejected or perverted, 
it works the greater evil when rejected. Pha- 



DID GOD HARDEN PHARAOH'S HEART? 285 

raoh's heart was once relatively susceptible; then 
he rejected and opposed God, and so his heart be- 
came a stone in his bosom. The Bible tells us 
that God hardened it, and it also tells us that he 
hardened it himself; and both statements are 
true in the senses already explained. When we 
neglect light and knowledge, they add to our con- 
demnation. Men may to-day pass over into the 
power of Satan as truly as Pharaoh was in his 
grasp. 

We do not so much need greater proofs of God's 
will as we need greater willingness to obey His 
will. Men do not need greater light so much as 
they need better eyes ; the light may be strong 
enough wellnigh to scorch their eyes, and yet 
they pretend that they do not see the path of 
duty. The most astounding miracles could not 
subdue Pharaoh's heart. Christ could not con- 
vince men who would close their eyes to His mir- 
acles and their ears to His words. He assured us 
that some men would not believe, though a 
preacher to them rose from the dead. The his- 
toric Lazarus rose from the dead, and some strove 
to put him to death. Christ rose from the dead, 
but some men to-day are so hardened in heart 
that they will not believe Him. 

God will assuredly in the end come off victori- 
ous. Resistance to Him will end in our utter de- 
feat. Each pleading invitation rejected will add 
to our guilt ; each gentle admonition refused will 
increase our insensibility. The Apostle Paul tells 



286 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

us of certain persons who were "past feeling." 
Open your hearts to-day to listen to God's call, 
lest the time may come when God will say, " Be- 
cause I have called, and ye refused; I have 
stretched out my hand, and no man regarded"; 
" I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock 
when your fear cometh." God forbid that it 
should be said of any who hear or read these 
w r ords: " Then shall they call upon me, but I will 
not answer; they shall seek me early, but they 
shall not find me : for that they hated knowledge, 
and did not choose the fear of the Lord." 



XVII. 

WAS THE PASSAGE OF THE RED SEA 
SUPERNATURAL ? 



XVII. 

WAS THE PASSAGE OF THE RED 
SEA SUPERNATURAL? 

This is an interesting and practical question; 
it has its relations to the wonderful events which 
mark the deliverance of Israel from the bondage 
of Egypt. The fourteenth chapter of Exodus 
records the miraculous passage of Israel through 
the Red Sea. By remarkable signs God attested 
the commission of Moses to Pharaoh. The num- 
ber of these signs was ten, expressive of their 
completeness. The hour was now near when de- 
liverance for Israel should come. God was not 
deaf to the cry of the oppressed which went up to 
His ear. Brave and wise leaders were needed; 
and the heroic Moses and the eloquent Aaron are 
the men for the hour. When the tale of bricks 
was doubled, then came Moses. When the knell 
of liberty seemed about to ring, then the song of 
hope sounded forth. If Moses and Aaron shall 
fail in reaching the heart of Pharaoh, the Al- 
mighty One, whose name is Jehovah, shall make 
him hear. 
*9 



290 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

The Deliverance. 

Probably the Pharaoh of the exodus was Men- 
ephtah I., the son and successor of Rameses II. 
This Rameses was called by the Greeks Sesostris ; 
he was the most famous of all the Pharaohs, being 
a mighty conqueror in Africa, Asia, and Europe. 
His statues and temples are found throughout the 
Nile valley, from Zoan to Nubia. His mummy 
was found in 188 1, in a rock chamber on the west 
bank of the Nile, near Thebes, and was trans- 
ferred to the Boulak Museum at Cairo. His son, 
Menephtah I., appears to have been inglorious, 
and to have died without finishing his father's 
tomb. With him probably Moses was familiarly 
associated in childhood within the palace. It 
must have been a startling experience to be 
authoritatively addressed by the friend of his boy- 
hood, now the leader of the captive people, and 
the representative of Jehovah. But a greater 
than Moses is here ; the Almighty is the leader of 
this deliverance. Moses knew, and Pharaoh was 
soon to learn, the truth of which Lowell has sung : 

" Right forever on the scaffold, Wrong forever on the 

throne — 
Yet that scaffold sways the future, and, behind the dim 

unknown, 
Standeth God within the shadow, keeping watch above 

His own." 

God has now made bare His arm for the deliver- 
ence of His chosen, and no power of Egypt can 



THE PASSAGE OF THE RED SEA, 291 

resist the onward march of the Almighty. The 
plagues followed each other in quick succession ; 
then came the last terrible night. Jehovah passed 
through the land of Egypt, and the midnight 
echoed with the loud wail of a nation's woe. The 
gods of Egypt, one by one, were utterly over- 
whelmed, and Jehovah is triumphant. The king 
seeks Moses and Aaron, and the people cry out in 
their bitter grief that he should permit Israel to go. 
Finally, Pharaoh says " Go" ; and the great exodus 
is begun. Egypt's slaves have become men and 
women ; a nation is born in a night. The journey 
to Canaan is begun, and Jehovah goes before His 
people. The pillar of cloud and of fire was more 
to Israel than was the brazier of the great Alex- 
ander to Greece. For a time all went well, for 
water and food were abundant, and the hearts of 
the people beat high with patriotic hope. But 
Israel had many lessons to learn — lessons as to the 
value of liberty and the necessity of righteousness 
to the preservation of liberty. These are lessons 
which we have not fully learned even to this hour. 
The people journey onward to Etham, on the 
edge of the wilderness. Should they continue 
their journey in that direction, they would pass 
immediately into the wilderness, and Pharaoh, 
pursuing them, would soon overtake and recapture 
the imperfectly armed fugitives. The Lord would 
not conduct them by the straight road into the 
land of promise lest the appearance of war should 
discourage them; still less might* he carry them 



OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

into the wilderness, where they might be readily- 
overtaken and entirely overcome by well-dis- 
ciplined soldiers. The order is therefore given 
to change the line of march, and soon they are 
encamped before Pi-hahiroth, the last encamp- 
ment before crossing the Red Sea. They are be- 
tween Migdol and the sea. Perhaps it is impos- 
sible, after the local changes of more than three 
thousand years, to determine these sites. Baal- 
ze-phon was over against Pi-hahiroth. Thus the 
Israelites had mountains on the west and south, 
and sea on the east. 

Pharaoh repented of his leniency in having let 
them go. The wound in his heart is healing, and 
the old satanic spirit is returning. When sick, he 
would be an angel; when well, he was a devil. 
He believed that the fugitives were entangled in 
the land and shut in by the wilderness. God has 
already been honored by His victory over Pha- 
raoh, and His glory will be still more signally dis- 
played. We now have an account of the pursuit 
of Pharaoh ; the third day has now arrived, and 
pride, ambition, and revenge fill Pharaoh's soul. 
Orders for instant preparation are given, and 
soon six hundred chosen chariots, belonging to 
the state, are pursuing Israel in hot haste. The 
pride and chivalry of Egypt are in Pharaoh's 
army; his knights are men-at-arms ready for any 
chivalrous and heroic service. Finely bred horses 
drew his war-chariots, and in each chariot was a 
warrior and a charioteer. The days of mourning 



THE PASSAGE OF THE RED SEA. 293 

over the dead first-born added to the fierceness of 
the attack on Israel. Terrible was the situation 
of Israel at this moment. The sight of the well- 
appointed soldiers of Pharaoh filled them with 
alarm. They forgot the wonderful interposition 
by which they had escaped thus far ; for the sight 
of their former masters amid the splendor and 
pomp of chariots and horses caused their hearts to 
fail with fear. On the west and south mountains 
frowned ; on the east rolled the sea, and yonder 
on the north the war chariots of Egypt, with 
apparently resistless might, were approaching. 
Though comparatively few in number, these 
horsemen and chariots had conquered mighty 
foes, and had given Egypt glorious victories. 
Shame on Israel's cowardice in the presence of 
Egypt's chivalry! Shame on Israel's meanness 
toward the heroic Moses! The prolonged period 
of slavery had robbed them of bravery. In the 
agony of their distress they charged Moses with 
having brought them into the wilderness to die. 
This is the treatment which this heroic and per- 
plexed leader receives from the cowards whom he 
is striving to rescue. This is evermore the fate 
of noble-hearted souls, who strive to lift the down- 
trodden into fuller light, larger liberty, and nobler 
manhood. Never was cynicism more cynical; 
never cowardice more cowardly. Slavery made 
these Israelites cravens; it transformed men into 
soulless things. The heart of Moses must have 
been touched to the quick with their cowardice; 



^94 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

from some part of the great host there ought to 
have been heard this brave voice : 

"Though love repine and reason chafe, 
There came a voice without reply, 
"Tis man's perdition to be safe, 
When for the truth he ought to die." 

These men knew but little of the infinite re- 
sources of the Almighty! Though hemmed in on 
every earthly side, one way was opened to Moses — 
the way upward to God's throne and heart. Moses 
is strong in faith. He assures the people that they 
shall see their enemy no more forever. He affirms 
that Jehovah shall fight for His own. Only God 
could deliver a defenceless people from an armed 
and infuriated foe. God's voice comes to Moses, 
"Whycriest thou unto me?" Then the command 
is given to stretch the rod out over the sea and 
divide it. God gives the assurance that again the 
heart of Mizraim shall be hardened, and that the 
people shall know that the Lord is God. We be- 
hold the cloud between the camp of Israel and the 
cam}) of Mizraim, light to one and darkness to the 
other. Xow we behold Moses stretching his hand 
over the sea. A strong east, or northeast, wind 
blows all that night, and behold ! the waters are di- 
vided, and the sea is made dry land. Thus the 
waves rolled back, and thus Israel marched for- 
ward. In dashed the pursuing Egyptians; their 
hosts are soon in the midst of the waters. We are 
told in language of mysterious majesty, that "the 



THE PASSAGE OF THE RED SEA. 295 

Lord looked" in the morning watch into the host 
of Egypt. It was a marvellous moment. Other 
Scripture clearly teaches that a storm burst upon 
the sea, that flash after flash of lightning shot 
through the midnight darkness, and peal after 
peal of thunder rolled over the heads of the be- 
wildered Egyptians. Their chariot wheels are 
removed, and, as the morning dawns, the hand of 
Moses is stretched once more over the sea. The 
waves roll backward. The chariots and horse- 
men, and all the army of Pharaoh sank like lead 
in the midst of the sea. Glorious was this display 
of almighty power. At one fell sweep the chiv- 
alry of Egypt is laid low. Soon the dead are cast 
upon the shore of the sea, and the song of Moses, 
one of the most triumphant paeans ever heard by 
human ears — more glorious than the Marseillaise 
of France, the " Ein ? feste Burg ist unser Gott" 
of Germany, the noblest songs of Puritanism in 
England, and the most patriotic hymns of 
America — is sublimely chanted, with the music of 
the stormy sea as its divine accompaniment. 

The Red Sea. 

This is the substance of the miraculous story 
told by the inspired penman. In order more fully 
to understand it, a few facts regarding the Red 
Sea may appropriately be given. The Red Sea 
is known by various names. Sometimes it is 
called simply the Sea; sometimes the Sea of 
Suph. and sometimes the Egyptian Sea. The 



2g6 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

Egyptians called it the Sea of Punt, that is, of 
Arabia; its Arabic name is Bahr-el-Hedjaz, from 
a province on its eastern coast, or Bahr-el-Ahmar, 
meaning M the reel. " The Erythrean, or Red Sea, 
was the Greek and Roman name. The word 
Erythrean means the same in Greek that Edom 
does in Phoenician and Hebrew. Suph denotes 
the wool-like seaweed found on its shores. The 
name " Red" Sea probably is from Edom, its 
northeast part having washed the country pos- 
sessed by the Edomites, or from the color of its 
corals, or possibly from the red zoophytes found 
at times floating on its surface. But the better 
opinion is that which gives the name " Red" from 
the pink colors found at times on the mountains 
on the shores; but the best explanation of the 
name is that which finds it in the word Edom, 
which means red. The Greeks borrowed the 
name from the Phoenicians. The name Edom 
was taken for an appellative instead of a proper 
name, hence the name Red Sea.to this day. The 
sea is a beautiful green or blue. The Black Sea 
is not black, the Blue Danube is not blue, the 
Yellow vSea is hot yellow, and the Red Sea is not 
red. It is really an arm of the Indian Ocean. On 
the east is Arabia, and on the west is Egypt. The 
straits of Bab-el-Mandeb, or Gate of Tears, con- 
nect it with the Indian Ocean. This writer will 
never forget the scorching heat which he experi- 
enced when he sailed over this historic sea. Since 
November, 1869, the Suez Canal has connected 



THE PASSAGE OF THE RED SEA. 297 

it with the Mediterranean. The sea is about 
fourteen hundred and fifty miles long, with an 
average width of one hundred and fifty miles. 
The north end divides into the Gulf of Suez on 
the west, the Gulf of Akaba on the east ; and be- 
tween these two bodies of water lies the peninsula 
of Mount Sinai. There is no doubt but that the 
sea was anciently connected with the Nile by a 
canal used by the Pharaohs, fifteen centuries be- 
fore Christ. Recently this canal was restored, 
and it is now the Sweet-water canal, giving water 
to the stations between the Mediterranean and the 
Red Sea, and causing fertility in many parts of 
the country which otherwise would be deserts. 
The sea is difficult of navigation because of sub- 
merged coral reefs ; it receives no rivers, but many 
rain torrents. 

The Natural and the Supernatural. 

There is no doubt but that in the time of Moses 
the sea extended at least fifty miles farther north 
than to-day. It is believed that this change has 
taken place w T ithin the historic period. If so, 
this is a fulfilment of the prophecy of Isaiah xi. 
15; xix. 5: " The Lord shall utterly destroy the 
tongue of the Egyptian sea," etc. Probably the 
" Lake of the Crocodile," the Birket-el-timsah, 
indicates the old bed. 

Where did the Israelites cross the Red Sea? 
This is a perplexing question. We follow them 
from Ramescs to Succoth, then to Etham, " in the 



igS OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

edge of the wilderness." Probably each place of 
encampment marked the close of a day's journey. 
The last camping-place was Pi-hahiroth. But 

where was that? Probably it was the name of a 
natural locality, and it seems to have been near 
the sea. How far was the passage of the sea 
natural, and how far supernatural? It is quite 
certain that the ten plagues, or at least several 
of them, were just what might have been ex- 
pected in Egypt. It is equally certain, also, that 
the order in which they occurred is the normal 
order in which the natural phenomena would 
operate. Thus the corruption of the river was 
naturally followed by the plague of frogs; and 
thus, from the dead frogs, gnats and flies were 
bred, and from these painful and poisonous in- 
sects came, in turn, murrain among the cattle 
and boils among the people. These plagues, in 
kind though not in degree, are actually experi- 
enced to this day in Egypt. Travellers there even 
now, when a southwest wind is blowing, observe 
swarms of locusts, and in the spring of the year 
they are known to come with an east wind. Le- 
pisus speaks of a " regular snowdrift of locusts." 
He also says ik that they fell down in showers, and 
this continued for six days." Even during the 
last few years, great storms of hail have occurred 
in Egypt, and thousands of cattle have been car- 
ried off by murrain. It was, therefore, to be ex- 
pected that God would use material immediately 
at hand for the punishing of the Egyptians. The 



THE PASSAGE OF THE RED SEA. 299 

natural element was in the presence of common 
plagues among the people ; the supernatural ele- 
ment was in the extent, fierceness, and succession 
of these plagues for the accomplishment of God's 
purpose in humbling the heart of Pharaoh and 
breaking the power of Egypt. 

The inspired narrative teaches us that there 
was a like commingling of the natural and the 
supernatural in the passage of the Red Sea. 
Travellers and scholars of many centuries and 
countries have given their best thought to this 
great event. Strabo, Josephus, Diodorus, Nie- 
buhr, Stanley, Robinson, Professor Palmer, Sir 
J. W. Dawson, and many others, have carefully 
studied every spot in the entire neighborhood, 
and every scrap of information on this important 
subject. But they contradict one another as to 
the place of the passage. Sir J. W. Dawson many 
of us are accustomed to follow with great readi- 
ness and satisfaction, but it is difficult to be sure 
regarding the authority which w T e should follow 
touching these much debated historic conclusions. 
There is no doubt, as already suggested, that the 
waters of the Red Sea once occupied a much 
larger area than at present. There is no doubt 
but that a strong east or northeast wind would 
produce a great effect upon the ebb and flood 
tides. The Seventy has south wind instead of 
east wind; the Bible word is # not definite, for 
kadim may refer to any rough wind ; the term is 
generic rather than specific. The statement that 



300 ()//) TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

the place of passage must have been broad, as 
the whole Egyptian army perished, is not well 
founded. The force employed against the Israel- 
ites was not large. There were only six hundred 
chariots, each carrying two men. This was prob- 
ably 'only the advance guard of a much larger 
army which later would join these chariots. We 
do not know how many ehariots went abreast. It 
is difficult, indeed it is impossible, to ealeulate the 
spaee which would have been taken by the Israel- 
ite multitudes. No doubt Moses caleulated these 
details with the utmost care. He was as wise as 
he was brave, and as practical as he was prayer- 
ful. To this hour the wind often drives out the 
water from parts of the Red Sea ; islets thus ap- 
pear, which look like huge stepping-stones; and 
so, at the head of the arms of the sea sandbanks 
and fords are found, which may have literally 
been trodden by the escaping Hebrews. Diodorus 
says that at times " the wdiole bay at the head of 
the sea was laid bare." Doubtless Moses, like 
the skilled leader he was, like the man who was 
master of the learning of the Egyptians, includ- 
ing geometry, surveying and hydraulics, and with 
a knowledge of the tides, took advantage of that 
knowledge at this critical hour. He would have 
been unworthy of his great responsibility had he 
not done so. Even though the whole event may 
have been in due course of nature, we must still 
see that God's will and purpose were thereby 
accomplished. All the processes of nature, ordi- 



THE PASSAGE OF THE RED SEA. 3 QI 

nary and extraordinary, are tinder God's control. 
There is a region in which in God's thought there 
is no distinction between natural and superna- 
tural ; we make such distinctions, but to God all 
is natural, and all is supernatural. We have seen 
that in all the miracles in Egypt there was a union 
of the natural and supernatural. This was not 
otherwise in the miracles of our Lord. He took 
advantage of the water when He made wine ; He 
availed Himself of the loaves and fishes in the 
hands of a boy when He performed a miracle to 
feed hungry thousands. Doubtless this is God's 
usual method. In the Bible the spiritual is the 
antithesis to the natural; the word supernatural 
is a human rather than a divine word. 

By admitting, nay, by insisting on, the pres- 
ence of the natural in this passage of the Red Sea, 
in harmony with the distinct statement of the in- 
spired historian regarding the strong wind that 
blew that night, we are very far from rejecting 
the miraculous element in the great event. All 
the resources of the universe are God's. It was 
He who caused the wind to blow; it was He who 
made the sea roll back in obedience to His will. 
The use of a natural wind gives additional honor 
to God in this event. 

His power and purpose are seen in that the 
wind blew at the right time and in the right di- 
rection to deliver the Israelites, and to destroy 
the Egyptians. If we reject the miraculous ele- 
ment in this marvellous event, how shall we ac- 



302 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

count for the shallower waters for Israel, and the 
deeper waters for Egypt? We affirm with undi- 
minished emphasis our faith in the reality of this 
miracle, and our increasing honor to God because 

of His ability to use natural forces at the right 
time, and with the necessary volume, and under 
the appropriate control for the accomplishment of 

His divine purposes. If the crossing took plaee 
near Suez — as probably, notwithstanding- all that 
has been said in favor of other localities, it did — 
the strong wind acting on the ebb tide could drive 
the waters from the arm of the sea near Suez, and 
possibly even from the end of the gulf. Thus the 
shallower parts would become dry, while, as Dr. 
Edward Robinson has suggested, the northern 
part of the arm would still remain in its normal 
condition. The waters would thus be divided, 
and so would be a wall — in the sense of being a 
barrier — to the Israelites on the right hand and 
on the left. The miracle was thus natural as to 
the means employed, and supernatural as to the 
application of these means for a divine and glori- 
ous end. Recent surveys clearly show that the 
narrator must have traversed the country, and 
have been an eye-witness of the events which he 
thus records. The narrative seems to have been 
a daily journal. 

Paul refers to the passage of the Red Sea as a 

<>f baptism, as it marked the beginning of a 

new era in the life of the Israelites. It was the 

crisis of the exodus; no event comparable to it is 



THE PASSAGE OF THE RED SEA. 303 

found in all the pages of that divine history. It 
gave inspiration to the genius of the psalmist, and 
the song of Moses on the Arabian shore is the 
prelude to that more triumphant paean, which 
shall be chanted by the redeemed, standing on the 
sea of glass, having the harps of God and singing 
the song of Moses and the Lamb. There is no 
difficulty in life too great for God. If we move 
forward in the performance of duty, every form 
of opposition will disappear, every foe will be 
overthrown, and victory from the hand of God 
shall assuredly be ours. 



XVIII. 

WHAT WERE THE SYMBOLS CALLED THE 
URIM AND THUMMIM? 



20 



XVIII. 

WHAT WERE THE SYMBOLS CALLED 
THE URIM AND THUMMIM? 

What were the Urim and Thummim? It 
would not be easy to ask a question to which a 
conclusive reply is more difficult. It has been 
suggested by some writers on this subject that 
as the Jewish exiles on their return from Babylon 
postponed the settlement of a difficulty till there 
should rise up " a priest with Urim and Thum- 
mim," so we may not be able to answer this ques- 
tion until a priest comes with Urim and Thum- 
mim to give us the answer as to what both were. 
Many learned scholars of different countries and 
centuries frankly confess that they do not know 
what these symbols were ; and some declare that, 
in their judgment, it is impossible ever to know, 
and that God probably meant that this discovery 
should never be made. 

But no earnest student of the Bible can ever 
be satisfied to pass the subject over in silence as 
the result either of indifference or cowardice; we 
are under solemn obligation to learn all which the 
Bible, rightly interpreted, can teach us. Both 



308 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

nature and revelation arc constantly giving up 
knowledge which bad remained quite mysterious 
or utterly unknown for ages. We must modestly 
and reverently strive to master every kind of 
knowledge which our minds are capable of receiv- 
ing, and which the divine storehouse contains for 
our instruction. Out of this treasury are to come 
things old and new. It is, of course, frankly ad- 
mitted that all kinds of knowledge are not of 
equal importance. What is necessary to our 
knowledge of salvation in Christ is simple; what 
is essential to our growth in grace is compara- 
tively plain. But, while thankfully and joyfully 
partaking of the sincere milk and also of the 
strong meat of the Word, we may profitably at- 
tempt to understand some of the things in differ- 
ent parts of the Bible which the Apostle Peter, 
referring to parts of the writings of his brother 
Paul, describes as " things hard to be understood." 
But in SO doing we shall not forget the plainer 
and weightier matters of the law. Matriculates 
in Christ's school may, with the angels, desire to 
look into the profound mysteries both of redemp- 
tion and revelation, and the Urim and Thummim 
belong to this class of mysterious and sacred 
tilings. Rightly studied, we shall find that even 
this subject is not without great value to us in our 
tical and spiritual lives; we shall clearly and 
joyously see that these mysterious symbols direct 
us to Christ, who is the world's true Light and 
glorious Perfection. 



WHAT WERE THE URIM AND THUMMIM? 309 

Various Theories. 

Various theories, as was to be expected, have 
been suggested in explanation of these remark- 
able symbols. Indeed, the literature of the sub- 
ject would make a library of considerable dimen- 
sions, for the solution of the problems connected 
with these symbols has proved to be as fascinating 
as it is confessedly difficult. It would be a com- 
paratively easy matter to give a summary of these 
various hypotheses; but it will be more profitable 
to follow a correct historical method, which shall 
account with reasonable fulness for the discover- 
able facts of Scripture regarding these symbols. 
The terms themselves we are able to understand 
without much, if any, doubt. To discover their 
meaning is a fair starting-point in our discussion. 
The Hebrew in Exodus xxviii. 30 is Urim ve-etJi 
liattummim, the " Lights" and " Perfections. " The 
Greek version makes the clause mean, " The 
Manifestation and the Truth." Other versions 
give it as " Enlightenings and Certainties," " Elu- 
cidations and Perfections," "Illuminations and 
Certainties," the " Lucid and the Perfect"; the 
Vulgate gives it as "Doctrine and Verity," and 
Luther, in his later translations, gave it as " Light 
and Right." 

Let us look carefully at the Hebrew terms in 
their order. Hebrew scholars are nearly unani- 
mous in making Urim the plural of Ur, light 
or fire; but, as we have seen, the vSeptuagint and 



3*o OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

other versions give a slightly different mean- 
ing to the word. The literal English equivalent 
Lights." Regarding Thummim there is also 
great unanimity of opinion in deriving it from 
the Hebrew word tow, meaning perfection or 
completeness. Some would derive the word from 
the Hebrew auioi, to be true, but the majority, as 
already stated, from the word tom^ some finding 
in it the meaning, "a twin," they imagining that 
the two groups of gems, six on each side of the 
breastplate, constituted the Urim and Thummim. 
The best English equivalents of these Hebrew 
words would be, light and perfection; for there is 
a traditional belief among the Jews, and a virtual 
consensus of opinion among all scholars, that the 
plural forms do not imply numerical plurality. 
This plural is probably what is called the plnralcs 
cxccllcntice, denoting the things or modes through 
which the oracle of God was given. Some have 
assumed that there is here what the rhetoricians 
call a hendiadys^ making the two words equivalent 
to perfect light; but, perhaps, the weight of 
authority is in favor of regarding the words as 
referring to distinct things. This latter idea is 
certainly suggested by the fact that in Numbers 
xxvii. 21, and i Sam. xxviii. 6, Urim is found 
alone. And in Deut. xxxiii. 8, the usual order is 
inverted, Thummim being given first. It is stated 
that, with the probable exception of Psalm xvi. 5, 
Thummim is never given alone. It is not sur- 
prising that different versions slightly vary the 



WHAT WERE THE URIM AND THUMMIM? 311 

meaning of these words; but the variations in 
meaning are more apparent than real. In Scrip- 
ture language perfection and truth, and light and 
truth are practically identical; that which is per- 
fect is truly performed, and that which is truly 
performed is necessarily perfect. In Joshua xxiv. 
14 we read: " Fear the Lord and serve him in 
sincerity and in truth"; the Hebrew is, betummim 
ubeemeth. We can see at a glance that here the 
idea of our obscure phrase is not remote from the 
thought of this exhortation. It is also in harmony 
with the thought expressed in 1 John iii. 18, " But 
in deed and in truth"; neither is it far removed 
from Psalm cxix. 130, " The entrance of thy words 
giveth light." We are also reminded of Psalm 
xliii. 3, " Send out thy light and thy truth." It is 
true that the words Urim and Thummim are not 
here found, but it is perfectly obvious that the 
psalmist has in mind the very thought which prob- 
ably these symbols set forth; and, indeed, his 
thought may be literally an echo of the high- 
priest's prayer when he went before God with the 
Urim and Thummim on his heart. 

Some Other Scripture References. 

These wonderful words come before us first in 
Exodus xxviii. 30. They are introduced in the 
account of the high-priest's apparel, and they are 
mentioned without a single word of explanation, 
as if they were already quite familiar to the writer 
and its readers. The breast-plate was a piece of 



312 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES, 

embroidery about ten inches square and of very- 
elaborate work, which the high-priest wore on his 
breast. The front was set with twelve precious 
stones, on each of which was engraved the name ' 
of one of the tribes. Inside the breast-plate, we 
are told, the Urim and Thummim were to be 
placed; and they were to be on Aaron's heart 
when he went in before the Lord. How we wish 
that at this point a few words of description and 
explanation had been given, but not a word is 
written. It certainly seems as if it were assumed 
that both Moses and the people would understand 
what was meant when the symbols are named. 
Joshua, when he became the successor of the 
heroic lawgiver, is commanded to stand before 
Eleazar, the priest, " who shall ask counsel for 
him after the judgment of Urim," and this coun- 
sel is to determine the course that Israel shall 
pursue. The Urim and Thummim are mentioned 
with the blessing of the tribe of Levi ; and they 
are mentioned in the history of the Judges, and 
Saul is left in darkness, being answered " neither 
by dreams nor by Urim nor by prophet." They 
are referred to also in other Scriptures directly 
or indirectly. Some have supposed because they 
are introduced without any explanation that they 
were of supernatural origin, and were unlike any- 
thing upon the earth. They are thus suddenly 
brought to our notice on the sacred page. So 
far as we can discover, no order was given for 
their construction ; and no hint is given that these 



WHAT WERE THE URIM AND THUMMTM? 313 

names were to be employed for any of the articles 
which Moses was to make. This obscurity has 
led many to suppose that God never intended that 
we should endeavor to solve this mystery; but 
there is no warrant for this opinion, any more 
than regarding a thousand things in nature and 
revelation which once were impenetrably mysteri- 
ous, but which now are exhaustively understood. 

Various Opinions. 

Were the Urim and Thummim the same as the 
Teraphim? This theory would make them noth- 
ing more than small divining images put into the 
lining or the folds of the breast-plate, and which 
miraculously spoke with an articulate voice utter- 
ing the oracles of God. This view distinguishes 
them from the twelve stones and from each other, 
and it makes them to have been placed in the 
chosen. It is not impossible .that there are certain 
passages of Scripture which show that the Tera- 
phim were used as a substitute for the Urim; but 
it is almost certain that if such were the case 
the substitution was the result of conformity to 
heathen ideas, and was not authorized by God. 
The Mosaic system was intended carefully to 
guard the people against the danger of image 
worship; but such a conception of the Urim and 
Thummim would make them contribute directly 
to the indorsement of heathenism. 

Others make .the Urim and Thummim bright 
stones, perhaps diamonds, in the form of dice. 



3M > TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

They suppose that a number of them were carried 

in the packet of the high-priest's chosen % and when 
he wished for a divine response they were thrown 
on a table, or on the ark of the covenant, and as 
they fell their position, according to laws under- 
stood by the priests, enabled them to discover 
the answer which God intended to give. But 
this view robs the whole proceeding of dignity 
and propriety, and brings it into the category of 
the rules or tricks of fortune-tellers; it is also 
without due Scripture warrant. Another theory 
makes these symbols a stone or plate placed in the 
middle of the ephod or within its folds, on which 
plate or stone the sacred name of Jehovah was 
engraved. By gazing on this the priest became 
capable of prophesying and listening to the divine 
voice communicating the will of God. This name 
of Jehovah is the Shemhamtnephorash of the Jew- 
ish Cabbalists; this is sometimes called the 
" Tetragrammaton," or four-lettered name of God, 
by the mystic virtue of which name the priest 
was enabled to pronounce luminous and perfect 
oracles. This conceit is now largely relegated to 
the figments of the Talmudieal rabbins, figments 
as numerous as they are childish and fantastic. 

Another view makes the Urim and Thummim 
identical with the twelve tribal gems, and makes 
the two words equivalent in meaning to, Perfect 
Illumination. We know that on these twelve 
stones the names of the twelve tribes of Israel 
were engraved, and when the high-priest went 



WHAT WERE THE URIM AND THUMMIM? 315 

before the Lord he bore " the judgment of the 
children of Israel upon his heart." According to 
Josephus and the Seventy, these jewels were the 
twelve precious stones of the breast-plate. This 
theory supposes that they revealed God's purpose 
by emitting an extraordinary lustre, or by an ar- 
rangement of letters forming the divine response, 
the letters necessary for that purpose being dis- 
tinguished from the other letters. This theory 
has various modifications in its essential features, 
and also in its incidental details. Some authori- 
ties would make the letters bright when victory 
was at hand, and dark when disaster was near. 
It is difficult to distinguish between the subor- 
dinate theories of different interpreters which 
have for their fundamental basis this general con- 
ception of the precious stones in the breast-plate 
as the Urim and Thummim. Probably these 
jewels still exist somewhere as symbols of the 
eternity and fidelity of God. It would be fascina- 
tingly interesting and equally instructive if they 
should some day be discovered and the mystery of 
centuries resolved. Some of those who hold this 
general view believe that as the high-priest fixed 
his eyes and concentrated his thought on these 
jewels and on the great attributes which they 
represented, he was able, partly by well-known 
laws as illustrated in hypnotism, and partly as the 
result of an immediate divine influence, to pass at 
once into communion with God and into a true 
prophetic vision. 



3 ,f) OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES, 

The Probabi e Explanation. 

Most of the theories now named may at once 
be eliminated from our discussion. There are but 
two which seem worthy of consideration. The 
first of these is that which identifies the Urim and 

Thummim with the twelve tribal gems and which 
regards the two words, by the figure of hendiadys, 
as equivalent to perfect illumination. This is 
the view which the author had strong- preposses- 
sions to adopt. There is much to be said in its 
favor. If the words were regarded merely as 
epithets applied to the stones in the breast-plate 
they would seem to be especially appropriate. 
These stones were intrinsically brilliant, splendid, 
and luminous, and thus they might apparently be 
termed with propriety Lights and Perfections. 
It is fair for us to assume that these stones were 
the most perfect of their kind. Then, again, if 
the Urim and Thummim were not identical with 
the gems of the breast-plate, it seems difficult to 
explain the fact that the inspired historian gives 
no account of their preparation and of their relig- 
ious uses. All other parts of the ritual are de- 
scribed with the utmost carefulness; every pin of 
the tabernacle and every thread of the priestly 
garments had to be made according to divine di- 
rection ; and yet here are symbols of the utmost 
importance in obtaining responses from God, and 
no account is given of their preparation or conse- 
cration for this sacred function. The silence of 



WHAT WERE THE URIM AND THUMMIM? 3*7 

the historian, it is natural to believe, gave a strong 
presumption that the Urim and Thummim were 
identical with the brilliant gems of the breast- 
plate. 

But there is an objection to this view suggested 
in Leviticus viii. 8, " And he put the breast-plate 
upon him; also he put in the breast-plate the 
Urim and Thummim." This passage clearly 
speaks of these symbols as being put into the 
breast-plate ; this seems to be also the clear mean- 
ing of the words in the verse, which is really the 
text of this discourse (Exodus xxviii. 30), "And 
thou shalt put in the breast-plate of judgment the 
Urim and the Thummim. " Other passages might 
be quoted illustrative of the force of the word 
"in" in this case (Exodus xxv. 16, 21), " And thou 
shalt put into the ark the testimony which I shall 
give. " This latter verse shows that the testimony 
was distinct from the ark into which it was put. 
It would, therefore, seem a natural inference that 
the Urim and Thummim were in like manner dis- 
tinct from the breast-plate, and that they bore to 
the breast-plate a relation similar to that which the 
tables of testimony bore to the ark of the cove- 
nant. It would thus seem that Moses, after in- 
serting the precious stones in the "pectoral," was 
commanded to put the Urim and Thummim into 
some fold or pouch of this same pectoral, even 
as he put the tables into the ark. It seems im- 
possible to avoid the conclusion that these symbols 
were in some way put into the fold or lining of 



318 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

the breast-plate. Dr. Bush in his comments on 
this verse strives to break the force of this reason- 
ing by stating that the stones of the breast-plate 
might not have been attached externally, but that 
the pectoral was of the nature of a bag- or pocket 
in which the stones themselves may have been 
deposited; but his reasoning fails to carry con- 
viction. 

The Most Approved Theory. 

Modern Egyptology furnishes us with a clew to 
the true explanation. All intelligent students will 
admit that there are many points of similarity be- 
tween the Jewish and Egyptian systems of wor- 
ship. For a long time both Jewish and Christian 
scholars were slow to recognize this fact. They 
feared that by admitting this similarity it would 
militate against Judaism as a divinely revealed 
religion. It was long believed that no custom, 
rite, or symbol was introduced into Judaism from 
any system of heathenism. Sometimes the trans- 
ference to Judaism of things common to it and to 
Egyptian heathenism was affirmed as a divine 
condescension to the superstitious notions of 
Israel when in a condition of ignorance and de- 
basement, but that view is not considerate or even 
tenable. Fortunately the prejudice of earlier 
times in this regard is now passing away. It may 
be true — it certainly is true, in some respects — 
that the Egyptians got many of their rites and 
symbols from the Hebrews, and no doubt the law 



WHAT WERE THE UR1M AXD THUMMIM? 319 

of reciprocal influence was in operation. In quite 
recent years so many new sources of knowledge 
on this subject have been made available that now 
the interchange of religious ideas and symbols is 
not a question of argument, but of fact. The an- 
cient paintings and sculptures not only give in- 
struction regarding the nation in peace and war 
but also concerning its social customs and relig- 
ious rites. We now fully know much which half 
a century ago was entirely unknown regarding 
the garments worn by the priests, and the cere- 
monial observances in their religious services. 
There is a striking similarity even between the 
Egyptian ark borne by the priests and the ark of 
the Covenant as described by Moses ; the similar- 
ity is found even in the manner in which both 
arks were carried. Did the Jews borrow from the 
Egyptians? Did the Egyptians borrow from the 
Jews? Did both derive their ideas from some 
common and patriarchal source? This latter is 
the most probable view; doubtless, many ideas 
came down from remote antiquity as the sons of 
Xoah were scattered to different lands. At the 
moment, we are stating the fact of this similarity 
and not attempting to account for it. The earliest 
religious ideas were preserved among the Jews 
in comparative purity, while among the nations 
which knew not God they were gradually cor- 
rupted and mingled with abominably idolatrous 
practices, but many essential truths still remained. 
Ideas, rites, and symbols would not be adopted 



$20 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

by the Israelites from the Egyptians merely be- 
e they were Egyptian; but they might be 
adopted beeause they were right, were primitive, 
were divine in their origin, and thus they might 
again be ordained by Moses. That in a corrupted 
form some of them were observed by the Egyp- 
tians is no reason why in their religious meaning 
and true form they should not be observed by the 
I lebrews. This consideration deserves emphasis ; 
it has been too much overlooked in past years in 
studying the Bible. 

Egyptian Teachings. 

Bearing these great principles in mind, we are 
prepared to see their illustration in connection 
with the Urim and Thummim. The Egyptian 
paintings show a pectoral ornament somewhat 
corresponding to the Jewish chosen or breast-plate. 
In addition to this discovery, two Greek historians 
call attention to the fact that the Egyptian arch- 
judge, who was always a priest, venerable in age, 
distinguished in learning, and commendable in 
character, always wore a gold chain around his 
neck — a gold chain to which was suspended an 
image made of a sapphire stone which was called 
in (ireek Alctlicia, meaning "Truth," when he 
officiated in civil and religious functions. With 
this image he touched the litigant when a suit 
began, and he permitted the winner to look upon 
it or to kiss it when he had gained his cause. It 
is believed that this image was a representation 



WHAT WERE THE URIM AND THUMMIM? 321 

of the goddess Thmei, who was worshipped as 
" Truth and Justice," and it is not a little remark- 
able that the very name of this Egyptian deity 
suggests the word Thummim. A mummy was 
found at Cairo around whose neck was found a 
chain, to which was attached a plate or symbol 
with the figure of a bird, which suggested Truth 
and Justice. It is interesting also to know that 
traces of a similar custom are found among the 
Romans, for among the Vestal Virgins she sat 
who w 7 as called "Maxima," and who assisted in 
the trial of causes. To this hour a triangular 
mirror is found in courts of law in Russia which 
in some mysterious way symbolizes the presence 
of the Czar and through him the presence of God. 
As one looks into the mirror and sees himself, so 
it is believed the Czar, and above him God, look 
into the heart. This mirror, indirectly at least, 
implies the presence of Justice, and the necessity 
of truth. Something similar is also known among 
the Japanese, and it is an interesting fact that to 
this hour in Great Britain "the royal mace" is 
borne by, or carried before, a magistrate as the 
symbol of his authority, and it must be laid upon 
the table of the clerk when the House is in ses- 
sion. It was long believed that the Egyptians 
derived the custom under discussion from the 
Jews after Solomon's marriage with the daughter 
of Pharaoh; but it is now quite certain, as the re- 
sult of comparatively recent studies, that these 

resemblances to Hebrew customs belong to a 
21 



3 t% OLD TES TA MEN T DIFFICUL TIES. 

much earlier period. This representation of the 
Egyptian goddess expressed the notion of two 

truths, or the double character of Truth and Jus- 
Before the election of a king among the 
Jews the chief priest was a civil officer as well as 
a religious functionary ; in this respect the analogy 
between the two peoples is all the closer. It has 
been reasonably suggested that the touch of the 
successful litigant with the image in the Egyptian 
court bears some relation to Isaiah vi. 7, " Lo, this 
hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken 
away, and thy sin purged"; also to Jeremiah i. 9; 
Esther v. 2, and many instances in the Bible in 
which touching represents the impartation or pos- 
session of miraculous power or virtue. 

If we were to carry out the similarity still 
further it might be found that the Urim and 
Thummim, as signifying Light and Truth, bear 
some analogy to the two figures of Ar, the Sun, 
and Thtnei) Truth — figures worn by the Egyptians 
in their breast-plate. Often Thmei is represented 
by a figure wearing two ostrich feathers. It is 
known also that in the final judgment Osiris is 
represented as wearing around his neck this 
double image of Justice and Truth. 

It is not forgotten that there have been argu- 
ments used against the Egyptian origin of the 
Urim and Thummim; but these arguments have 
already been virtually named in connection with 
our discussion of the tribal gems in the breast- 
plate as the Urim and Thummim. It is known 



WHAT WERE THE URIM AND THUMMIM f 323 

that in the early days, as even now, peculiar virtue 
was often attributed to gems as amulets and 
charms; thus jasper, amethyst, emerald, and all 
stones were supposed to have a peculiar signifi- 
cance and to be influential in warding off evil and 
in bringing good. We cannot suppose that God 
would indorse any heathen or superstitious ideas 
in the use of such a symbol, but He could exalt it, 
purify it, and glorify it, and make it a part of true 
worship. We know that in Egyptian thought the 
mystic Scarabaeus was an emblem of profound sig- 
nificance ; as it came out of the dark earth after 
the flood of waters it was therefore the symbol of 
life out of death and of transformation and resur- 
rection. In many countries various symbols came 
to be virtually thoughts and words in painting or 
sculpture. Thus some symbol, whether or not 
suggested to the Hebrews by the Egyptians, 
seems to have been placed in the chosen, setting 
forth the great and glorious fact that Light and 
Truth were a blessed revelation from God, were 
the centre of the nation's life, the guiding star of 
the nation's progress, and the glorious ideal of 
the nation's hope. This was the Urim and 
Thummim. 

Typical Significance. 

There is not space to discuss the process of con- 
sulting Jehovah by Urim and Thummim; there 
is, perhaps, even greater doubt regarding the 
method of consultation than regarding the Urim 



3M OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

and Thlimmim themselves. It seems certain that 
these symbols were closely connected with the 
theocratic government of the Hebrews, and that 
after that government passed away this method 
ot consulting God seemed also to have passed 
away. All pertaining to the office of the high- 
priest was typical of the Christian dispensation 
and of the office and work of Christ. This is, 
doubtless, true also of the Urim and Thummim. 
Christ is the glory of the old dispensation. He 
is the very heart of the Bible. He was and is the 
true Urim and Thummim ; He was the end of the 
law for righteousness ; He was che reality of every 
symbol, the substance of every shadow, the de- 
sire of every longing heart. He was Light, Per- 
fection, and Truth. He was " the true light which 
lighteth every man that cometh into the world." 
He was Perfection, " being made perfect, he be- 
came the author of salvation to all that obey 
Him." He was Manifestation: "He was God 
manifest in the flesh." He was also "the Way, 
the Truth, and the Life." Through the Urim and 
Thummim a measure of the Holy Ghost was 
granted to the Jewish high-priest ; but Christ is a 
high-priest who possesses the Holy Ghost without 
measure. Christ is a high-priest "who put on 
righteousness as a breast-plate." Christ is the 
glorious Luminary of the new Jerusalem. He is 
its Perfection. Perhaps the Urim and Thummim 
are suggestive also of "the white stone" which is 
beautifully symbolic in the Christian mysteries as 



WHAT WERE THE URIM AND THUMMIM? 325 

set forth in the book of Revelation. We are thus 
sweetly led by the Lights and Perfections, the 
Urim and Thummim, to the cross, to the feet and 
to the heart of Jesus Christ, the Light of all dis- 
pensations, of all religions, of all philosophies, of 
all civilizations and of all experiences, and the 
crowning glory, cloudless beauty, and ineffable 
bliss of the heavenly city, the new Jerusalem. 



XIX. 

DID BALAAM'S ASS LITERALLY SPEAK 
WITH MAN'S VOICE? 



XIX. 

DID BALAAM' S ASS LITERALLY 
SPEAK WITH MAN'S VOICE? 

The narrative in Numbers the twenty-second 
chapter, and the allusion to this narrative in 2 
Peter ii. 15, 16, have been regarded by most Bible 
readers and commentators as fraught with great 
difficulties. In the minds of some Christians 
these difficulties are so great that they are dis- 
posed to reject the entire narrative as fictitious, 
or at least as utterly inexplicable. It is, there- 
fore, of very great importance that an interpreta- 
tion shall be found which is true to the original 
narrative, and which at the same time relieves it 
from difficulties which many consider to be in- 
superable. It is believed that a genuinely alle- 
viative interpretation can be given which is also 
thoroughly loyal to the inspired record, more 
loyal, indeed, than the traditional interpretation. 

Balaam is a profoundly mysterious and a 
strangely interesting man. He comes suddenly 
into the sacred narrative, and his name reappears 
in the Book of Revelation. It is evident that in 
the church at Pergamos, Rev. ii. 14, there were 
those who taught, as did Balaam, so as to lead 
men into idolatry and the gross sins of the flesh. 



330 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

The teachings of the Nicolaitanes were of like 

character and tendency. Much of mystery at- 
taches to the name, which means "conquerors of 
the people." Perhaps both names, Balaam and 
Nicolaitanes, are used symbolically, like the name 
Jezebel, to designate certain types of false teach- 
ers. Balaam's first appearance is as abrupt as 
that of Elijah the Tishbite, and is as mysterious 
as it is abrupt. He is at the same time a truly 
instructive historical character. He is almost 
as mysterious as Melchizedek, and yet his life 
is full of lessons of the greatest practical value. 
Both in his virtues and his vices he is thoroughly 
human. He is richly endowed with the gift of 
prophecy ; and he utters sentiments worthy of the 
heartiest commendation. The words which he 
spake to Balak, as recorded by the prophet Micah 
vi. 6-8, are not surpassed in loftiness of thought 
and eloquence of speech by any words of man re- 
corded in the Bible. These noble sentiments are 
an anticipation of the Sermon on the Mount; they 
are worthy to stand beside the sublimest truths 
uttered by the Apostle Paul. The man who 
spoke these great truths was fully inspired of God, 
so far as concerns their utterance. God used 
Balaam in wonderful ways in connection with the 
progress of true religion; and his name is thus per- 
petuated through all generations. There is no liter- 
ary honor so great as a place in the divine library 
which we call the Bible. Compared with this honor 
all the glory of human fame is less than nothing. 



DID BALAAM'S ASS LITERALLY SPEAK? 33 1 

In the Book of Numbers xxii. 5, Balaam is in 
troduced as the son of Beor, who in 2 Peter ii. 15 
is called Bosor. This form of the word may be a 
Chaldaism ; for many believe that the Apostle 
Peter was in Babylon at the time of this writing. 
But the change in the form of the name may be 
due to the transmutation of the letters with the 
desire of softening the sound of the original He- 
brew word. Among the Midianites, to whom 
Balaam belonged, he seems to have exercised an 
authority not unlike that possessed by Moses 
among the Israelites. In Numbers xxxi. 8 his 
name is mentioned in connection with the five 
kings of Midian, indicating that he possessed high 
rank and exercised great authority. His home 
was at Pethor, a city of Mesopotamia and prob- 
ably on the banks of the Euphrates, although its 
exact site is entirely unknown. Some have sup- 
posed that as Pethor is derived from the word 
pathor, to "interpret," it is the name of a place 
which was the chief resort of men who professed 
to explain occult arts and to interpret the will of 
the gods. The name Balaam may mean " lord of 
the people," but others understand it to be "the 
destruction of the people," with an allusion to his 
supposed supernatural powers ; and it is also sug- 
gested that his father's name probably comes 
from a root meaning to consume or destroy. God 
now and then chooses out persons dwelling among 
the heathen and endues them with remarkable and 
unexpected knowledge of Himself for the accom- 



OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

plishment of His great and holy purposes. Ba- 
laam belonged to this class of divinely chosen in- 
struments in God's method of dealing with men. 
lie certainly was a man of high intellectual attain- 
ments; indeed, he was in the true sense of the 
word a genius of a rare order. He had poetical 
and prophetical gifts as great as they were rare 
then and now; he was literally a seer and a poet. 
He possessed remarkable intuitions of spiritual 
truth ; and he also recognized God as the author 
of his unusual endowments.. He thus stood on 
that mysterious borderland which overlaps true 
religion on the one side and gross heathenism on 
the other. Ever and anon in different ages and 
lands inexplicable men of this character are found. 
Some of these men are partly deceived, and are 
partly deceivers; and often the most analytic his- 
torian cannot draw the lines of separation between 
these two conditions. Indeed, often the men 
themselves could not always tell when they w r ere 
acting under high motives and when impelled by 
the grossest ambitions. The great plays of 
Shakespeare finely illustrate the apparently con- 
tradictory elements in the lives of men. Now 
Dr. Jckyll comes forward and now Mr. Hyde ap- 
pears in many lives in man}' lands and at various 
times; it is not otherwise in some measure in the 
lives of all men. There were times when the 
Apostle Paul was distinctly conscious of these con- 
tradictory elements in his deepest nature. 



DID BALAAM'S ASS LITERALLY SPEAK? 333 

Historic Glimpses. 

Balaam's natural and acquired gifts gave him 
great influence among his contemporaries. It 
was believed that he had power not only over 
temporal, but, to some degree at least, over 
eternal destinies; and also that his blessing or 
curse had the approval of God. Josephus calls 
him an "eminent diviner." He has been well 
called by Bishop Xewton " a strange mixture of a 
man"; for while he practised an art expressly 
forbidden to the Israelites, he possessed some 
true knowledge of Jehovah, rendered Him wor- 
ship, and received from Him divine communica- 
tions. Balaam finally came to believe that his 
great gifts were his own, and that he might use 
them to advance his personal interests. The 
Israelites were now marching to the occupation 
of Palestine ; on the plains of Mo.ab, on the east 
of the Jordan, they were encamped. At that time 
Balak was king of the land. He had heard of the 
wonderful manner in which the Israelites had 
overcome the Amorites, and he is filled with 
alarm. He knows that he has no chance what- 
ever in fighting these victorious invaders; he 
feels that if they come to battle he had better sur- 
render at once. He puts the case very strongly 
when he declares that the Israelites can " lick up 
all that are round about us, as the ox licketh up 
the grass of the field." What shall he do in his 
great distress? He hears of Balaam, the sooth- 



334 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

sayer of Pethor. He will now have recourse to 
the supernatural. He will enlist divine pow r er 
against his foe. Here a great truth is suggested; 
an important lesson may he learned. It is 
eminently wise to invoke supernatural aid, but 
we should be quite certain that the aid invoked is 
truly supernatural. We ought not to be satisfied 
with appealing to Balaam or Simon Magus. Balak 
entered into a league with the Midianites against 
the Israelites. He also hastily sent messengers 
to Balaam in his remote home with rich rewards 
to secure his help in divination. At first Balaam 
refused with emphasis; but later he hesitated, 
and expressed a desire to seek wisdom from God 
in prayer. He ought to have known better than 
to pray in those circumstances. His duty was 
clear; he ought not to ask God to help him in 
compromising right with wrong. Other messen- 
gers came to Balaam with promises of greater 
gifts and honors. Again he juggled with right 
and endeavored to cheat God. God finally granted 
him his desire, but assured him that in the end 
his plans would be frustrated. The narrative at 
all these -points is remarkably suggestive and in- 
structive. It deserves to be more fully studied at 
these points than tin: purpose of this discourse 
will permit. 

We now see Balaam starting on his journey 
with the rs of Balak, king of Moab. 

God was much displeased with Balaam's impor- 
tunity, and yet He granted him in some sense his 



DID BALAAM' S ASS LITERALLY SPEAK? 335 

desire. On the journey he met the angel of the 
Lord, who stood before him, lesatan lo y for a 
Satan to him, or an adversary against him. Now 
comes the remarkable narrative, Numbers xxii. 
2 3 _ 35- This entire narrative is worthy our most 
careful thought. We are here told that the dumb 
brute spake with a human voice. The animal 
seemed to have a deeper spiritual perception than 
its rider. The ass saw the angel standing in the 
way with drawn sword in hand. Balaam smote 
the creature that he might induce it to continue 
the journey. It is a strange story. What is its 
true interpretation? Is it a narrative of events 
which literally occurred as here stated? There is 
not space to go, in the effort to answer this ques- 
tion, into all the details of the narrative ; but two 
possible interpretations can be given, and only 
two views can well be taken, and the reason for 
the adoption of one and the rejection of the other 
will be stated. 

Two Interpretations. 

Is this narrative literal history, or is it merely 
a vision? Is this a description of an objective or 
a subjective experience? Did the words ascribed 
to the ass proceed literally from its mouth, or was 
the scene transacted in the mind of Balaam in a 
condition of ecstasy or trance? These are the 
questions to be answered ; let them be kept dis- 
tinctly before our thought. Either answer might 
be given with certain modifications by those who 



OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

fully believe in the authenticity of the narrative; 
the correctness of the narrative is not to be ealled 
in question whichever of these interpretations may 
be adopted, for the question is simply one of in- 
terpretation. Those who believe that this is a 
literal narrative affirm that the incidents recorded 
must be assumed to be literal, so long as no in- 
formation to the contrary is given. They claim 
that it would be unnatural to expect any of the 
occurrences to be a vision, except a statement to 
that effect was made; and that if the visionary 
element were introduced it would be difficult to 
tell where it ended and where the historical nar- 
rative began; and they claim, finally, that the 
Language of the Apostle Peter, in his second 
Epistle ii. 16, favors the literal sense. Are these 
claims well founded? We may say in reply that 
we know with absolute certainty that there are 
numerous instances in the Bible where we have 
abrupt transitions from one style to another, and 
that no mention of the transition is made. The 
Bible supposes some degree of sanctified common 
on the part of all its readers. The sacred 
therefore, slide frequently from events 
in the natural world to the relation of a vision 
or dream wherein notice of the transition is 
in. 
In Genesis KV. i we are told that the word of the 
Lord came to Abraham in a vision. In the fifth 
braham is asked to look toward heaven 
and to tell the stars, and he is assured that like 



DID BALAAM'S ASS LITERALLY SPEAK? 337 

to their great number shall be his seed. In the 
twelfth verse we see, as Dr. Bush in his comments 
on the narrative especially under discussion re- 
minds us, that it was the daytime when Abraham 
saw the stars, indicating that this sight was a 
vision and not a literal reality. In Jeremiah xiii. 
1-7 we see that Jeremiah was commanded to go 
to the river Euphrates and hide his girdle ; but at 
the time this command was given the prophet was 
in the land of Canaan, hundreds of miles from the 
Euphrates. It was clearly a command given in a 
vision. So Ezekiel when in the land of Babylon, 
Ezekiel viii. 1-12, was ordered to dig a hole in 
the wall at Jerusalem ; and he was then shown the 
abominations of the house of Israel, a transaction 
which certainly must have taken place in a vision. 
The voice addressed to Samuel w T hen he minis- 
tered unto the Lord before Eli, 1 Sam. iii. 1-10, 
was clearly of the character of a vision ; and in 
the fifteenth verse of that chapter we distinctly 
read, "Samuel feared to show Eli the vision," 
march, a word always, or generally, used of in- 
ternal visions. In John xii. 28, 29, we are told of 
the voice which came from heaven, and it is quite 
evident that it was addressed to the inner sense of 
those for whom it was especially intended; for 
others heard it only with the outward ear, and to 
them it was simply a meaningless noise, or the 
voice of an angel. In the narrative of Paul's con- 
version, Acts ix. 3-8, there is no suggestion that 
the leading events were simply or chiefly internal 



01 D TESTAMEN T DIFFICl r L TIES. 

Or subjective; but when we compare with that 
account Acts xxii. 9 we are inevitably forced to 
the conclusion that, in its deep significance, it 
was to the Apostle Paul a vision. ( Hhcr instances 
might be furnished leading to the same conclu- 
sion. The language of the Apostle Peter does 
not forbid this interpretation. In quoting a pas- 
sage from the Old Testament he does not neces- 
sarily confine himself to any one interpretation 
which we may give of that passage. He takes the 
passage as he finds it. In like manner we could 
refer to a character in Shakespeare or in any great 
writer, and we might use the language of that 
character without entering into a full discussion 
1 various interpretations of the language, or 
of the relation which the character sustains to the 
original author's purpose. Could not the Apostle 
Peter, or any other apostle, have referred with 
perfect propriety to the Lord's call to Samuel, al- 
though it was in a vision? Was not that call just 
as real when addressed to the inner ear as it would 
have been if addressed to the outer car? It is 
not a qtiestion of the reality of the divine com- 
munication, but only of the method which God 
chose to employ. 

rivE Evident* e. 

We have only to turn to Numbers xii. 6 to see 

that dreams are designated as the usual mode of 
divine communication to the prophets. This fact 
certainly goes far to confirm our belief in the sub- 



DID BALAAM'S ASS LITERALLY SPEAK? 339 

jectivity of the incident tinder discussion. We 
there read : " Hear now my words : If there be a 
prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself 
known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto 
him in a dream." Balaam belonged to the class 
of whom this affirmation is made. Why should 
we doubt the correctness of this positive affirma- 
tion of Scripture? Is not the narrative before us 
in perfect harmony with this divine promise? 
When we look at chapter xxiv. verses 3, 4, 15, 16, 
we see that Balaam speaks of himself as the man 
" which heard the words of God, which saw the 
vision of the Almighty, falling into a trance, but 
having his eyes open," etc. Perhaps we ought 
not to quote the words "into a trance"; the He- 
brew may admit only of the translation "falling," 
or "falling down"; but the statement has its ap- 
propriate application to the incident recorded in 
the narrative whose true interpretation we are 
aiming to give. Was not that the occasion when 
Balaam was in this condition of prophetic ecstasy? 
To what other occasion can these words be so 
well applied? That condition was the appropriate 
one for a seer like Balaam. Those who deny the 
application of this statement to this incident 
should clearly establish the correctness of their 
denial. It is difficult, if not impossible, to name 
another event in the life of Balaam to which this 
language so fittingly can be referred. It seems 
almost certain that the appearance of the angel 
was to the inward and not outward eye ; and just 



54o OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

*o the voice of the ass was intended for his spir- 
itual and not physical car. 
Another argument in favor of this view is that 

im expresses no astonishment on hearing the 
ass -peak; neither do his servants; neither do the 
Moabitish princes who accompanied him. They 
seem to have heard nothing unusual and to have 
seen nothing supernatural. If Balaam had heard 
the ass speak, we might expect him to have been 
struck speechless with astonishment at so unusual 
an event. But he goes on speaking almost with 
pendancy, chiding the brute as if it had been a 
disobedient servant. His language certainly is 
not what we might expect from one who had wit- 
nessed a prodigy so remarkable as an ass speaking 
with a man's voice. It is also to be said that the 
drift of Jewish interpreters, as well as that of 
many great Christian scholars, favors the sub- 
jective explanation. Maimonides leads off with 
an indorsement of this interpretation; Leibnitz, 
Ilengstenberg, and Tholuck, and among compara- 
tively recent American scholars Dr. George Bush, 
and the writers in Smith's and other Bible dic- 
iries, earnestly support, or at least incline to 
this same view. 

Thi loes not in any way deny the historic 

ent; it nowhere denies, or even 

depreciates, its miraculous occurrence and its 

divine influence. God is seen to exert such an 

influence on Balaam that the reproof which he 

Lved sank dee]) into his heart. lie saw this 



DID BALAAM'S ASS IITERALLY SPEAK? 341 

wonderful sight with the eyes of his soul, and he 
heard this powerful rebuke with his spiritual ear. 
The angel was revealed to him in his prophetic 
or ecstatic state. Which ever view we adopt we 
see that the occurrences were realities to Balaam. 
The subjective view does not make the events to 
be less real. In any case there was a direct com- 
munication from God to Balaam. God could 
have put the sound of words into the mouth of 
the beast, or into the ear of Balaam ; and in either 
case it would be equally the work of God, and 
would be equally effective. We may readily be- 
lieve that all the incidents narrated actually oc- 
curred on the natural plane, with the exception 
of the angelic appearance and the miraculous 
speech, which were perceived by the spiritual eyes 
and ears of Balaam. To him it was all a terrible 
reality ; to him this was a real theophany, a gen- 
uinely divine interposition. It was just as real 
as if it had all been a literal sight and sound. 
Why should we doubt the correctness of this inter- 
pretation? Certainly it is in harmony with God's 
usual method of revealing Himself in that age ; 
for no one can doubt that His revelation was, for 
the most part, by dreams and visions. Balaam's 
history in this connection shows that in two cases, 
at least, he waited until night, the usual and nat- 
ural season for dreams and visions. There is 
no certain evidence that God ever revealed Him- 
self otherwise to Balaam, unless this case be an 
exception. Why should we introduce a new 



34* OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

method on the part of God? Why insist on a 
needlessly difficult interpretation when an easier 
one is in harmony with God's ordinary mode of 
communication? Xone of those present, as al- 
ready suggested, seem to have been cognizant 
that any communication was made to Balaam. 
No wonder is expressed; no alarm was experi- 
enced ; no comments were made. Let us adopt 
an interpretation which fully meets all the re- 
quirements of the case, which relieves the narra- 
tive from the enormous difficulties of the literal 
interpretation, and which is in perfect harmony 
with God's usual method of communicating His 
will to Balaam, and to other Old-Testament seers, 
which is in harmony with the statement in Num- 
bers xii. 6, and in equal harmony with the words 
of Balaam in the twenty-fourth chapter. Why 
refuse to accept the teachings of these Scrip- 
tures? Why create difficulties? Why not believe 
the Bible, letting Scripture interpret Scripture? 

Additional Teachings. 

God can and often does reach out His hand and 
choose 1 1 is servants from among idolatrous peo- 
ples. Perhaps reports of the miracles attending 
the exodus had reached Balaam in his own land; 
perhaps he was a descendant of Shem, and the 
germs of religious truth may have lingered long 
among the people. Perhaps Jacob's residence 
for twenty years in Mesopotamia disseminated 



DID BALAAM'S ASS LITERALLY SPEAK? 343 

the elements of true religion, though mingled with 
much superstition. God can still select His great 
instruments out of the most unfavorable environ- 
ments. Balaam even spoke of God as " the Lord 
my God." Balaam's sin was great. He dared, 
for the reward which Balak offered, to abuse his 
office as a prophet, and to think that his divine 
gifts were his own, and to call down curses on 
God's people. He admired righteousness, but he 
loved the wages of unrighteousness. The bearer 
of sublime messages of Jehovah, he still counselled 
that the young women of Moab should lead the 
Hebrews to worship Baal-Peor, and as a result 
twenty-four thousand Israelites were slain. His 
conduct in this regard was abominable in the ex- 
treme. 

But even Balaam, as he himself frankly con- 
fessed, could speak only as God ultimately di- 
rected. He was powerless in the presence of the 
Almighty. He was obliged to bless those whom 
he wished to curse. It is glorious to serve a God 
who can make even the wrath of men contribute to 
His praise. The fearful doom which befell Balaam 
warns us against seeking gain in ways of sin. If 
we are to die the death of the righteous, as Balaam 
hoped he might, we must live the life of the right- 
eous as God commands us, and as our highest 
interest here and hereafter requires. 

God still speaks. 



XX. 
DID THE SUN AND MOON STAND STILL? 



XX. 

DID THE SUN AND MOON STAND 
STILL? 

Many persons are greatly troubled by the diffi- 
cult miracles and histories recorded in the Bible. 
There was a time when the miracles were sup- 
posed to be of great evidential value. At that 
time, the greater they were in number, and the 
more stupendous they were in character, the 
greater was their supposed value. But that day 
has passed away, and it is not likely to return. 
Now the miracles themselves, in the judgment of 
many critics, need the support of alleviative ex- 
planations. Many persons turn away from the 
Bible, not because of what it really teaches, but 
because of what they suppose that it teaches. 
We ought always to bear in mind that to believe 
the Bible is one thing, but to believe all the in- 
terpretations of the Bible which some persons 
choose to give is quite another thing. Miracles 
performed by God we joyfully receive ; but mir- 
acles imagined by commentators we certainly are 
at liberty to reject. Unfortunately, to doubt the 
interpretations of Scripture given by some men 
is to lead these men to declare that you doubt the 
revelations given by God ; but one must be loyal 



34S OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

>d's truth even at the expense of losing the 
good opinion of traditional interpreters of that 

truth. 

No one who really believes in God can doubt 
the possibility of miracles. We know that God 
metes out the heavens with a span; we know 
that he holds the waters, even of the mightiest 
oceans, in the hollow of His hand. We must 
firmly believe that, by introducing laws now un- 
known to us, He could stop the clock of the uni- 
verse without jarring its mechanism. The ques- 
tion before us is not, Could God perform the 
stupendous miracle of causing the sun and the 
moon to stand still? The simple question is, Did 
God cause the sun and moon to stand still at the 
command of Joshua? Does the account in Joshua 
x. i z-\\ declare that the sun stood still? It may 
be unhesitatingly affirmed that it is not so stated 
in this Scripture, nor clearly in any other portion 
rod's Word. We know well that a man can 
arrest the progress of a machine many thousand 
times greater than himself; and we may confi- 
dently affirm that God could arrest the progress 
of the world in its course around the sun. All 
the discoveries of modern science, when rightly 
understood, make it easier to believe in God, in 
prayer, and in all spiritual realities. Let us clear- 
ly understand that the only question before us in 
rd to this passage is a question of fact. Was 
the writer speaking in impassioned and figurative 
language, or speaking in the language of sober 



DID THE SUN AND MOON STAND STILL? 349 

and literal truth? These, let it be repeated, are 
simply questions of fact. This passage, it is 
frankly admitted, has given great difficulty to 
many commentators, and to all apologists of re- 
vealed truth. God for wise purposes has intro- 
duced miracles into both the Old and the New 
Testament, but for equally wise purposes He has 
apparently reduced them to a minimum. Let us 
look at some of the interpretations which have 
been given to this vexed passage. 

Different Interpretations. 

Many of the early rabbis and Christian fathers 
took the literal view of the passage. They sup- 
posed that the sun actually stood still in the 
heavens. The sun was then believed to revolve 
around the earth; thus these interpreters were 
ignorant of the diurnal motion of the earth, which 
has been wellnigh the universal doctrine since 
the time of Galileo and Copernicus. This view 
was held even after the reception of the Coperni- 
can system of the universe ; but it was then ex- 
plained as optical rather than strictly literal. It 
made, in this later modification of the view, the 
earth and not the sun the stationary body at the 
command of Joshua. These interpreters, how- 
ever, differed among themselves as to the length 
of time during which the sun or the earth was 
stationary; some said forty-eight hours, some 
thirty-six, some twenty-four, and some twelve. 



35° OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

Another class o{ interpreters, led perhaps by 
Spinoza, affirmed that the miracle was caused by 
refraction and reflection. This view made the 
sun to appear above the horizon after the usual 
time of setting. We know that we get the after- 
glow of sunset in the diverse forms familiar to 
travellers in lofty mountains and in high latitudes. 
This result might he caused by a change in the 
atmospherical medium, and so the sun might ap- 
pear to be above the horizon even after it had set. 
This explanation makes the miracle much less 
formidable than the literal view necessitates. It 
makes, as we have seen, a change merely in the 
atmospheric medium, and it leaves the rotatory 
motion of the earth undisturbed. The sun always 
is set before it appears to us to have gone below 
the horizon; by the law of refraction it appears 
to us to be above, when really it is below the hor- 
izon. According to this interpretation, all that 
it was necessary for God to do was to increase an 
effect observable in our daily experience. We 
would then have visibly the same result as if the 
earth had actually paused in its revolution round 
its axis. This explanation will relieve the minds 
of many readers of the Bible, and it will account 
for the phenomenon which some believe they find 
in this famous passage in Joshua. But is it nec- 
ry to introduce even this modified view? The 
real question before us, as already remarked, is 
simply one of fact. A third view is related to the 
one just given ; it is what is called the subjective 



DID THE SUN AND MOON STAND STILL? 35 J 

prolongation of the day. According to this inter- 
pretation, the day was not really lengthened, but 
was supposed by Joshua and the Israelites to 
have been prolonged. They were so busily en- 
gaged in conflict with their enemies, and they 
accomplished so much in the time, that they did 
not take accurate account of the time. It seemed 
to them that the day had been prolonged, and the 
writer simply records the popular opinion. This 
interpretation will relieve some minds of the stu- 
pendous difficulties inseparable from a strictly 
literal interpretation of the passage. There is a 
fourth interpretation which, it has been well said, 
is among the curiosities of biblical exposition. 
This view supposes that the lightning which ac- 
companied the hailstorm was prolonged far into 
the night, and that thus the darkness was so il- 
lumined as to appear like daylight. 

The Better View. 

Is there not a more satisfactory explanation 
than any of those thus far given? The view pre- 
sented first by Maimonides, the learned Jew born 
at Cordova, March 30th, 1135, a master in the He- 
brew Scriptures, the Talmud, and Jewish litera- 
ture generally, is that the passage is simply a 
poetic way of saying that the Israelites won their 
sublime victory before the setting of the sun. 
Before the day closed five kings with their armies 
were utterly vanquished. This view is indorsed 



OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTlMS. 

by HengStenberg, and by many other commen- 
tators, Jewish and Christian, Roman and Prot- 
estant. 

It is very doubtful whether a strict interpreta- 
tion o\ the words will warrant us in making Josh- 
ua's language a prayer to God. Are we obliged 
to regard his words as more literal than the apos- 
trophe of Isaiah, "Oh that thou wouldst rend 
the heavens and come down, that the mountains 
would ilow down at thy presence"? Are the 
words to be taken as more literal than the state- 
ment of Deborah and Barak that, " The stars in 
their courses fought against Sisera"? Are they 
more literal than the words of the psalm, "The 
hills melted like wax at the presence of the Lord"? 
Or the words of the other psalm, " The mountains 
skipped like rams"? Are they more literal than 
the words of Isaiah, "All the trees of the fields 
shall clap their hands"? Joshua's words remind 
the words of Wellington at Waterloo — " Oh, 
that Bliicher or night would come!" There is in 
the lk Iliad*' a prayer by Agamemnon not unlike 
the words of Joshua on this occasion: 

4l J ov<J greatest, J°ve most glorious sky-dweller, cloud be- 
dight, 

L< I Dot the sun nor darkness fall and wrap the world in 
night, 

Till Priam's stately palace I cast in ruin low." 

It is to be said in genera] that the words in the 
original have been greatly misunderstood. The 



DID THE SUN AND MOON STAND STILL? 353 

author's meaning is very obscure. The language 
attributed to Joshua is abrupt, broken, impas- 
sioned. It is absolutely certain that literally ren- 
dered it does not assert that the sun remained in 
the heavens a day, nor an hour, longer than its 
usual time. The passage simply affirms that the 
sun stood still long enough for the people to be 
avenged upon their enemies ; it did not set until 
the great work of that heroic day was completed. 
A people, unused to the appliances of war, over- 
came with great slaughter soldiers fully armed 
and trained to military exploits. The sun and 
moon were witnesses of the valorous deeds of 
God's people; they held their courses until the 
triumph was complete. 

It is fitting that we should look at the words a 
little more closely; a careful examination will 
show that even a tyro in Hebrew poetry can see 
that the words will not bear the meaning usually 
given them by traditional interpreters. It is very 
doubtful whether the language attributed to 
Joshua is, in any real sense, a prayer. No He- 
brew scholar will deny that here nothing is said 
of a direct address to Jehovah ; the address is not 
to God, but to the sun and moon. We see at once 
that the language in the original properly means, 
not to Jehovah, but before, or in referenee to Je- 
hovah. The verb translated " stand still" in the 
original is " ddm" and it generally means " cease," 
"rest," "be still," "keep silent." The meaning 
" stand still" seems to be an inference from the 
23 



354 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

thirteenth verse, and not a translation. In Ex- 
odus xv. [6 and in Lamentations ii. 10 this verb 
signifies to be dumb with terror. It is often used 
figuratively to signify a silent or submissive frame 

o\ mind. See Psalms lxii. u; iv. 4; xxxvii. 7, 
and Isaiah xxiii. 2. It is thus certain that the 
meaning is very indefinite. We have positively 
no right to make this word certainly mean that 
the sun's course was arrested in the heavens. It 
is also to be observed that the phrase in the thir- 
teenth verse, " hasted not to go down about a 
whole day," is a mistranslation. The Hebrew 
keydm tdtnitn means as at the perfect day. This 
says nothing whatever about the sun's remaining 
in the heavens for a whole day. If we compare 
Exodus xxxi. 18, and other scriptures in which a 
similar expression is found, we shall have full 
proof of the correctness of the interpretation now 
given. 

It is distinctly stated in the thirteenth verse 
that this account is written in the Book of Jasher. 
The sipher haydshdr, or the " Book of the Upright," 
appears to have been a collection of eulogistic odes 
in praise of national heroes. This quotation is 
thus a part of a triumphal song, like that recorded 
in the fifth chapter of Judges, where in the twen- 
tieth verse there is a very similar thought, which 
has already beet) quoted in this article. The 
Book of Jasher is mentioned in 2 Samuel i. 18, 
where reference is made to teaching the use of 
the bow. There it is said the David's lamenta- 



DID THE SUN AND MOON STAND STILL? 355 

tion is partially an extract from this book. Some 
have supposed that this book refers to some book 
or books of the Bible itself, but that is not the 
common opinion. No one can read Joshua x. 
even in English without feeling that verses 12-14 
are a quotation, if not an interpolation. No allu- 
sion is found in the Scriptures to this event, ex- 
cept in an obscure passage in Habakkuk iii. 11; 
and Josephus makes but a slight reference to this 
supposed miracle. A vast structure of argument 
has gathered around this passage, and it is now 
time that it should fall to the ground. The im- 
portance of the passage has been greatly exag- 
gerated both by the friends and the foes of 
revealed religion. It is certain that in our 
version the passage is somewhat of a mis- 
translation; it is also equally certain that it 
is a quotation, anfi it is possible that it is an 
interpolation. In no case ought this uncer- 
tain passage longer to trouble devout students 
of the Word of God. 

Josephus simply says in referring to this inci- 
dent: " The day was increased, lest the night 
should check the zeal of the Hebrews." We have 
seen that if we accept the historicity of the nar- 
rative, it can be explained by the recognized laws 
of refraction and reflection without involving the 
tremendous consequences not only upon the globe 
itself, but upon the entire solar system, and even 
upon the equilibrium of the whole material uni- 
verse, which the traditional interpretation neces- 



35 6 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

sitates. The Copernican system as set forth by 
Galileo invested the passage, interpreted liter- 
ally, with alarming importance. Around it fierce 
ecclesiastical battles have been fought. The Vati- 
can has had a eonspieuous share in these battles, 
and has had often to confess its defeats. The 
explanation of Kepler is deeply interesting: " They 
will not understand that the only thing Joshua 
prayed for was that the mountains might not in- 
tercept the sun from him. Besides, it had been 
very unreasonable at that time to think of astron- 
omy, or of the errors of sight; for if any one had 
told him that the sun could not really move on 
the valley of Ajalon, but only in relation to sense, 
would not Joshua have answered that his desire 
was that the day might be prolonged, so it were 
by any means whatsoever?" 

In writing a history of the Civil War one might 
well quote Whittier's words in " Barbara Frit- 
chie": 

"'Shoot, if you must, this old gray head, 
But spare your country's flag, ' she said," 

without becoming responsible for the exact and lit- 
eral truth of the story of this woman's loyalty. 
It is affirmed that history will not indorse the 
details of the poem. The writer of the Book of 
Joshua quoted from a book of poems; he so in- 
forms us in connection with the quotation. Why 
can we not believe him? Why must we create 
difficulties which the writer takes pains not to 



DID THE SUN AXD MOOX STAND STIIL? 357 

suggest? Let the battle over this vexed passage 
cease ; let us take its own explanation of itself. 
Let God's Word interpret itself, although it prove 
many human interpretations to be erroneous. 
God's Word will stand forever. 



XXI. 

DID JEPHTHAH REALLY SACRIFICE HIS 
DAUGHTER? 



XXI. 

DID JEPHTHAH REALLY SACRIFICE 
HIS DAUGHTER? 

This question has for many generations per- 
plexed Bible students. The fact that Jephthah, 
in the eleventh chapter of Hebrews, is mentioned 
as one of the heroes of faith, has led many per- 
sons to doubt that he really offered his daughter 
in sacrifice. Volumes have been written on the 
subject of his rash vow; and many writers have 
stoutly maintained that his character should be 
relieved from the dark stain of having offered his 
daughter as a sacrifice in consequence of that vow. 
The account is found in the eleventh chapter of 
the book of Judges. 

Jephthah was the ninth judge of Israel, and was 
of the tribe of Manasseh. His father's name was 
Gilead, and he was born out of wedlock. His fa- 
ther having died, his brothers, who refused him 
a share of the heritage, expelled him from his 
home. He then withdrew to the land of Tob, 
which was beyond the limit of Hebrew territory. 
He was distinguished always by great bravery of 
character and by equal skill in arms. After his 
banishment by his brothers, a number of desper- 
ate men gathered about him, and he became the 



\MENT DIFFICULTIES, 

leader of this reckless band. In this respect his 
life was not unlike that of David after his with- 
drawal from the court of Saul. Jephthah and his 
companions thus resorted to a life of brigandage; 
but such a life was not deemed dishonorable in 
the East in those days, nor in very much later 
times, especially so long as freebooters preyed 
simply upon public or private enemies and were 
not guilty of needless cruelties in their brigand- 
age. They might rob and possibly murder, but 
they must do both with delicacy and despatch, 
and, according to the rules of their order, with 
some degree of gentlemanly deportment. This 
class of men were the Robin Hoods of that early 
day. We well know that in the border wars be- 
tween England and Scotland a class of men of 
similar character long flourished with some degree 
of governmental authority and general approval. 
We also know that Columbus in his early life, and 
Drake and Raleigh, the naval heroes in the time 
of Elizabeth, and others of this general character, 
were really pirates. Jephthah was a freebooter 
of this class, and his aggressions were confined to 
small neighboring nations, who were in some sort 
the enemies of Israel even when a nominal peace 
was observed. 

The Deliverer and Judge of Israel. 

The Ammonites and their allies had held the 
country east of the Jordan in subjection for eigh- 
teen years. Once more the people turned in peni- 



DID JEPHTHAH SACRIFICE HIS DA UGHTER? 3 6 3 

tence to Jehovah, and once more He heard their 
prayer and sent them deliverance. The daring 
deliverer at this time was Jephthah, the rugged 
chieftain and reckless freebooter. His dashing 
exploits and successful enterprises gave him the 
reputation of great bravery and superb heroism. 
Notwithstanding that his brothers had driven him 
from home, when his kindred were groaning un- 
der foreign oppression, the people generally looked 
to this lawless compatriot for deliverance. It 
must have been a proud day for him when the 
deputation was sent to invite him to take com- 
mand. He did not quite forget the treatment he 
had formerly received, but after some demur and 
delay he consented to be the leader of Israel's 
faithful band, who determined to return to God 
and to overthrow the enemies of the nation. The 
Ammonites were assembled in force when Jeph- 
thah sent to them demanding a reason for their 
invasion. His whole procedure was marked by a 
certain kind of rude dignity which we cannot but 
admire ; it shows that even in that early day some 
provocation was required before any war was con- 
sidered justifiable. The spirit of our own time 
in this regard was thus early anticipated. There 
is no nation to-day in Christendom that would 
declare war except it had grounds for the declara- 
tion which other nations might be expected heart- 
ily to approve. This fact makes nations extremely 
slow in our day to issue the final declaration mak- 
ing war inevitable. This principle seems to be 



364 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

deeply rooted in human nature. Jephthah recog- 
I the propriety of this procedure; and the 
Ammonites also felt obliged to justify their ag- 
sive operations by affirming that the land be- 
yond the Jordan belonged to them rather than to 
the Israelites. The Ammonites were its owners 
before it was taken from them by the Amorites, 
from whom, in turn, the Israelites had captured 
the territory. On these grounds they attempted 
to justify their effort to recapture the soil. Jeph- 
thah laid down in his reply a principle which has 
been observed through the centuries among civ- 
ilized nations — a principle which the great writers 
on international law have repeated and empha- 
sized. It is most interesting to discover in this 
remote country and time the germs of interna- 
tional law r as it has been fully developed in our 
own time. It was here affirmed that by right of 
conquest the Israelites secured the territory from 
its actual possessors; thus the Israelites could not 
recognize the claim of any former possessors, who 
had rendered them no assistance in securing the 
territory, but who had rather opposed the claims 
of the Israelites. The Ammonites, however, con- 
tinued to assert their claims to the soil, and thus 
the issue was joined, and finally resort was had 
to the arbitrament of war. Jephthah thus saw 
that all negotiations with the king of the Ammo- 
nites would be fruitless. The Spirit of the Lord, 
as a spirit of strength and bravery, came upon 
him, and he at once prepared for war. The Gil- 



DID JEPHTHAH SACRIFICE HIS DAUGHTER? 365 

eadite elders consented — and their consent was 
solemnly ratified before the Lord in Mizpeh — that 
in the event of being victorious Jephthah should 
be considered as the head of the nation. 



His Solemn Vow. 

The war on which he entered was likely to be 
severe and deadly. Jephthah was under profound 
emotion; and he, in a spirit of reckless daring 
not unmingled w T ith religious devotion, solemnly 
vowed to the Lord, " If thou shalt without fail de- 
liver the children of Ammon into my hands, then 
it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the 
doors of my house to meet me, when I return in 
peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely 
be the Lord's, and I will offer it up for a burnt 
offering." The word here rendered "what- 
soever" in the authorized version may be ren- 
dered "whosoever," as it is without distinction 
of gender. 

Jephthah girded himself for war. He burst 
upon the enemy with terrific fury. He drove 
the Ammonites before him, capturing twenty 
towns from Aroer on the Arnon to Minnith and 
to Abel Keramim. The Ammonites thus sus- 
tained a terrible overthrow. Jephthah was thus 
victorious, and he returned in peace to his house 
in Mizpeh. The news of his glorious victory pre- 
ceded his own return to Mizpeh ; but instead of 
being met by an animal or by a slave, his only 



OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

daughter, in whom his heart was hound up with 
peculiar tenderness, idled with pride because of 
her father's splendid victory, came forth with 
timbrels and with dances to meet the triumphant 
hero. Her fair companions joined her in this 
hour of gladness and glory. But the sight of his 
daughter, dancing in the joy of her heart, was 
enough to freeze the blood in the father's veins 
and to stop his heart in its beating. What can it 
all mean? Xo sooner did he see his daughter 
than he rent his robes and cried, "Alas! my 
daughter, thou has brought me very low; for I 
have opened my mouth unto the Lord and cannot 
go back." The music is hushed; the maiden 
draws near in silence. The hero of the hour is 
the picture of despair. The wretched man for- 
gets all the victories of the battle in this moment 
of domestic tragedy. Nobly does the heroic 
maiden speak: "My father, if thou hast opened 
thy mouth unto the Lord, do to me according to 
that which lias proceeded out of thy mouth; for- 
asmuch as the Lord hath taken vengeance for 
thee of thine enemies, the children of Amnion." 
beautiful young life is the awful price of his 
great victory, and the noble but misguided young 
woman insisted that he should not disregard his 
ow. The bearing of both is equally 
striking in this sad calamity in their family life. 
Must she die- -she, his only child, and so young 
and beautiful' The greatness of the sacrifice he 
must make almost crushes his life; but the brave- 



DID JEPHTHAH SACRIFICE HIS DAUGHTER? 3 6 7 

spirited maiden rises with a noble grandeur above 
her own sorrow, and above her father's grief, 
with her mistaken conception of God and duty ; 
she glories in her father's and her nation's vic- 
tory, even though it be at the price of her own 
beautiful young life. She is calm when rough- 
cheeked warriors turn pale and quiver with sor- 
row. She merely asks for a short period to be 
given her, which she will spend in the lonely 
depths of the mountains bewailing her sad fate — 
bewailing, as did the Antigone of Sophocles in 
her special grief, that she must die without the 
hope of becoming a bride or mother in Israel. 
No doubt all eyes were turned in admiration on 
the heroic girl. Then came the last sad scene, 
for " he did with her according to his vow." 

The Daughter's Fate. 

What was the fate of Jephthah's daughter? 
What did he do unto her according to his vow? 
Volumes have been written in answer to this 
question. It has been stoutly maintained that ho 
did not offer her in sacrifice, but that she was 
simply doomed to a life of perpetual celibacy. 
Others, as Professor Bush, have affirmed that a 
human sacrifice was contemplated, but that dur- 
ing the time when the maiden bewailed her vir- 
ginity upon the mountains, Jephthah obtained 
better information respecting the nature of vows, 
and that finally he redeemed his daughter at a 



'AMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

legal valuation. As between this view and that 
of perpetual celibacy the idea of legal redemption 
is more probable; but neither view meets the con- 
elusion that "he did with her according to his 

vow." If she were preserved from death there 
would be no significance in the lamentations of 
the daughters of Israel, and to make the word 
" lamentations" mean " celebrations" is certainly 
a forced significance. There is really no difficulty 
in the text ; the entire difficulty arises from our 
unwillingness to accept the text in its natural 
meaning. Commentators have, therefore, in- 
vented a new thing in Israel, both in ancient and 
in modern times, that a damsel should be conse- 
crated to perpetual virginity in consequence of a 
vow of her father. All unprejudiced interpreters 
n 1 ust admit that nothing of this kind is contained 
in the vow; they must also admit that this idea is 
utterly foreign to all Hebrew notions regarding 
wifehood and motherhood. If commentators are 
at liberty, because of their dislike to accept the 
teaching of any part of Scripture, to inject into 
a given passage what, naturally interpreted, it 
clearly does not contain, then vScripture can be 
made to mean anything which commentators de- 
sire. Many Jewish interpreters admit that Jeph- 
thah sacrificed his daughter, 'ind affirm that she 
not devoted to perpetual virginity or to any 
form of religious service. It is even alleged that 
the dynasty of the house of Elcazar was passed 
over to that of Ithamar because the high-priest 



DID JEPHTHAH SACRIFICE HIS DA UGHTER? 369 

permitted this horrible sacrifice to be performed.* 
We do not know where the immolation took place, 
but probably on some altar in the wild region be- 
yond the Jordan. The painters represent it as 
having taken place at the altar of the Tabernacle, 
and Jewish authority can be quoted for this view, 
but it is utterly impossible to believe that such a 
terrible sacrifice could have taken place at the 
altar of God, and a high-priest as the sacrificer. 

The Horrible Sacrifice Hateful to God. 

The story of this sacrifice lingered long in the 
memory of the people ; and for generations after- 
ward Jewish maidens, in sympathy with the self- 
sacrificing spirit of Jephthah's daughter, bewailed 
her fate. The story brings us into the atmos- 
phere of classical times. We are reminded of the 
sacrifice of Iphigenia, the daughter of Agamem- 
non and Clytemnestra. Agamemnon having 
vowed to offer her, and having failed to keep his 
vow, the Grecian ships could net sail from the 

* Joseph Kimchi is especially the author of the interpre- 
tation that the maiden was shut up in a house which her 
father erected for this purpose, and that she was there vis- 
ited by the daughters of Israel four days in each year while 
she lived. It is true that Hebrews such as Levi ben Ger- 
som and Bechai, and Christian scholars such as Grotius, 
Bishop Hall, Dr. Hales and some others of earlier and 
later times have adopted this view. Lightfoot for a time 
held this view, but more careful study led him to abandon 
it and adopt the interpretation which the story naturally 
teaches. 

24 



37o OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES, 

port of Aulis against Troy until the offended gods 
propitiated by the sacrifice of the maiden. 
There is thus often a close likeness between the 
Hebrew story and those of the heathen nations of 
nearly contemporaneous times. It was an age of 
rash vows. The whole nation made a vow against 
the tribe of Benjamin, and King Saul made a vow 
which nearly cost Jonathan his life. Jonathan 
would have been slain but for the interposition of 
the army ; but there is no mention of an interposi- 
tion on behalf of the heroic but misguided maiden 
and her brave but superstitious father. Without 
doubt the darker view of this tragedy is the cor- 
rect one. It is true that human sacrifices were 
forbidden by the law; but Jephthah lived in 
Gilead, and Gilead adjoined the countries of Moab 
and Amnion, where human sacrifices were com- 
mon. In the unsettled times in which the Judges 
lived many Israelites adopted the cruel practices 
and superstitious customs of their heathen neigh- 
bors, even good men performing acts as truly for- 
bidden by the law as were human sacrifices. 
Tims an altar was set up by Gideon at Ophrah 
against the distinct law on that subject. It can- 
be denied that human sacrifices were in these 
rude times often considered meritorious and pro- 
pitious by some Israelites, as by almost all the 
heathen peoples. This was the first and last hu- 
man sacrifice offered in a mistaken interpretation 
of the will of Jehovah. We must constantly bear 
in mind that this was a time of anarchy, ignorance, 



DID JEPHTHAH SACRIFICE HIS DA UGHTER P 37 I 

and superstition. Vows of celibacy were then 
entirely unknown among the Hebrews ; the idea 
of nunnery belonged to a much later period, and 
to a different condition of society. It is affirmed 
that the maiden could not be dedicated to the ser- 
vices of the high-priest, for he and the ark were 
then at ' Shiloh in the territory of Ephraim, and 
Jephthah was then at deadly war with that tribe. 
There is something peculiarly painful in the 
idea that this maiden, perhaps crowned with 
flowers and led forth with music and song to the 
altar, could have been a sacrifice pleasing to God. 
This act was the result of a false principle and a 
foolish vow ; it was an act utterly hateful to God 
and utterly repugnant to all the finer feelings of 
human nature. Let us in no way hold God or 
true religion responsible for so cruel, abominable, 
and w T icked an act. Such an act was not per- 
formed because its perpetrators had true religion, 
but simply because they were utterly lacking in 
true religion. It was not performed because God 
commanded it or approved it, but because its per- 
petrators, living in a heathen atmosphere, were 
ignorant of God's will, and so committed an act 
unspeakably displeasing to God and dishonoring 
to man. Tennyson in his poem, " A Dream of 
Fair Women," gives a glowing picture of this 
maiden lifted above herself in her desire to bless 
her country, assist her father and honor her God; 
but her mistake was as great as her self-sacrifice 
was heroic. 



XXII. 

DID SAMUEL APPEAR WHEN SUMMONED 
BY THE WITCH OF ENDOR ? 



XXII. 

DID SAMUEL APPEAR WHEN SUM- 
MONED BY THE WITCH OP ENDOR? 

Saul, the first king of Israel, is one of the most 
romantic and tragic characters of history. He 
was the son of Kish of the tribe of Benjamin, and 
his name means " the desired one." Zelah was 
probably the place of his birth. His father was a 
wealthy and powerful chief; and Saul while 
searching for lost asses found a kingdom. A 
"seer" was met on the journey, and he was none 
other than the prophet Samuel, who after a little 
time poured over Saul's head the oil of consecra- 
tion. Saul was an unusually attractive man at 
that moment, as he towered head and shoulders 
above average men. He received both an inner 
and an outer call to the new life which awaited 
him by the ordainment of God. The latter call 
was given him at Mizpeh, when in his modesty 
he was hidden in the circle of the baggage which 
surrounded the encampment. His great stature 
aroused the utmost enthusiasm of the people; 
and soon they shouted, "Long live the king." 
This was the first time this shout was ever heard 
in Israel, and perhaps in the world — a shout 
later so often heard both in ancient and modern 



37<S OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

times in scenes of joy and sorrow, of comedy and 
tragedy. 

Later, when Saul had apparently returned to 
private life, he heard as he drove his oxen near 
Gibeah those wild lamentations peculiar to Eastern 
towns when some great calamity has come. Soon 
he learned that Nahash, king of the Ammonites, 
had issued a terrible threat against Jabesh Gilead. 
The Spirit of God came upon Saul, as upon the 
Judges in an earlier day; and the shrinking and 
timid man was immediately transformed into the 
brave patriot and heroic leader. The bones of 
two of the oxen which he was driving were sent 
through the country as a suggestive message. 
The people came in a body to meet Saul at Bezek. 
The Ammonites were totally routed. Soon under 
the direction of Samuel at Gilgal the monarchy 
was inaugurated anew, and Saul was recognized 
with solemn sacrifices as the victorious leader in 
the kingdom, and was publicly installed and 
anointed. Samuel virtually gave over his own 
administration to Saul, whose military successes 
produced a profound impression on the people, 
and thus the monarchy was fully established. 

Saul's First Transgression. 

We are passing over great movements with 
only the briefest mention. We see Samuel grad- 
ually withdrawing from the responsibility of 
leader until Saul fully assumed that position be- 
fore all the people. God was the true King, and 



DID SAMUEL APPEAR WHEN' SUMMONED? 377 

Saul simply His lieutenant. This relation was 
well understood both by Saul and the people. 
This is the true idea of the theocracy ; but unfor- 
tunately when Saul was put to the test of this idea 
he proved unfit for his high office. The first 
trial led to the threat which ended in his rejection 
by God; for Saul forgot that he was only the ser- 
vant of Jehovah. In the second year of his reign, 
as it is believed, he strove to shake off the heavy 
Philistine yoke. This yoke was peculiarly griev- 
ous in his own tribe, over which a Philistine 
officer exercised some degree of authority. Soon 
he raised a small army, which under the leader- 
ship of the noble Jonathan took a fort of the Phil- 
istines. Saul later was reduced to a great ex- 
tremity, and the seventh day having come, whose 
expiration Samuel had enjoined Saul to await, 
Saul ordered sacrifices to be offered. Whatever 
was the exact nature of this act, the fact was soon 
recognized that Saul in performing it had greatly 
sinned against God. Saul's conduct at this point 
virtually involved a rejection of God, and the as- 
sumption of the claim to conduct the war accord- 
ing to his own will rather than God's command. 
Upon Samuel's arrival after the completion of the 
sacrifice he pronounced a curse on Saul's thought- 
less zeal. Soon after, largely through the bold 
exploits of Jonathan, aided by a panic of the 
enemy, Saul effected a great slaughter; but his 
rashness led almost to the death of Jonathan. 
The reckless vow of Saul regarding this truly 



37^ s OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

heroic son was the first appearance of Saul's mad- 
ness. The Philistines, however, were driven to 
their own country, and for a time were confined 
within its limits. ( Treat honor thus came to Saul, 
as no previous ruler had reached so high a posi- 
tion and had won so striking a triumph. Now he 
began the organization of a royal establishment, 
and we soon see the beginning of the institutions 
which marked the monarchy. There is the nu- 
cleus of a standing army; there is a bodyguard of 
young, tall, and handsome Benjamites; and there 
are official runners and messengers. David and 
Abner are the two principal officers at court, and 
they sat with Jonathan at the king's table. An- 
other officer was the keeper of the royal mules. 
The king now appears in state. His tall spear 
became the symbol of his office; and it is still the 
mark of the dignity of the Bedouin sheik. It was 
reproduced in the great iron staff always carried 
by Ivan the Terrible of Russia as the symbol of 
the Czardom. This spear was ever after asso- 
ciated with Saul in battle, at his meals, and in 
his repose. It is as inseparable from his name 
as is the harp from David's name. We now see 
Saul with a diadem on his head and a bracelet on 
his arm. lie has become an autocratic rather 
than a theocratic king. 

Saul's Second Transgression. 

The years pass. There is war with Amalek; 
and in sparing the conquered king and retaining 



DID SAMUEL APPEAR WHEN SUMMONED? 379 

the spo:l Saul disobeyed the command of Samuel. 
Thus he failed a second time in the trial of his 
obedience to God and to His prophet. He failed 
to extirpate the Amalekites, whose hostility to the 
people of God was so old and so fierce. Saul 
probably spared the king in order to make a 
greater parade at the sacrificial thanksgiving. 
Josephus expressly says that Agag was spared for 
his stature and beauty; such a prisoner would 
greatly grace Saul's triumph. At southern 
Carmel he set up a monument, probably a tri- 
umphal arch of myrtles, olives, and palms, to 
commemorate his victories. His spirit of rebel- 
lion against God led to his final rejection ; and his 
disobedience led Samuel to withdraw all approval 
from Saul. The separation between them was 
indicated by the rent in Samuel's robe of state, 
as he tore himself away from Saul's grasp. He 
was thus left to his sins and their inevitable pun- 
ishment ; and we read that " Samuel mourned for 

Saul." 

His Last Offence. 

From the time of Samuel's rejection of him 
Saul's life is one long tragedy. Doubtless at 
times he was mentally and morally insane. The 
frenzy which occasionally only touched him lightly 
at other times controlled him completely. He 
became at times the victim of melancholia; and 
then the subject of fierce and uncontrollable pas- 
sion. David's harp temporarily chased away his 
sorrow ; but soon it came back associated with the 



3S0 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

savage madness which broke out against David 
and Jonathan. The monarchy which he had or- 
ganized was breaking down at every point. The 
Philistines were again in the land, and their char- 
md horses swept over the Plain of Esdraelon. 
Near Shtmem their camp was pitched. On the 
opposite side, on Mount Gilboa, was the army of 
Israel, clinging to the heights for safety against 
the resistless chariots of the Philistines. Great 
events are rushing on apace. Saul's army is near 
the spring of Harod, or the Spring of Trembling, 
a name which assumed an evil omen in connection 
with this sad history. The cup of Saul's iniquity 
is fast filling; he is to perform just one more act 
of open rebellion against God and that cup will be 
full. It is a solemn moment in Saul's checkered 
life. He is crossing the boundary line between 
God's patience and His wrath. God help us all 
when that terrible crisis comes, as come it may, 
in our lives! 

Saul had driven out those who practised necro- 
mancy; perhaps his act was intended in some 
sense as an atonement for his many forms of dis- 
obedience to God. As we now see him his condi- 
tion is desperate. lie is forsaken of God and of 
men. No oracles now give him any communica- 
tions of God's will. Samuel is dead, Samuel on 
whom he had leaned in so many crises for help, 
and had not leaned in vain. David is now alien- 
ated, David whose dash and bravery, love and 
loyalty had so often spared or delivered Saul in 



DID SAMUEL APPEAR WHEN SUMMONED? 381 

times of great danger. There is one witch left in 
the land ; and we are now to see in Saul a strange 
mixture of superstition and religion at this trying 
moment. He asks his attendants to seek out for 
him a woman who had a familiar spirit, as the 
vague phrase in the narrative describes her. The 
expression more literally is " a mistress of the Ob," 
a name which is derived from the leathern bag, 
sometimes called a bottle, used in magical incan- 
tations, and it may suggest the practice of ven- 
triloquism ; the Septuagint translates the word " a 
ventriloquist." Probably the name " Ob" is so 
given because it was supposed that the spirit or 
demon which possessed the necromancer inflated 
the body so that it protuberated like the skin 
used as a bottle. The Ob of the Hebrews was 
thus exactly similar in conception to the Pytho of 
the Greeks, and the name might be used both for 
the performer and for the spirit which was sup- 
posed to possess him. Saul's act was positively 
forbidden by the law, Lev. xx. 6, which sentenced 
such pretenders to death, and Saul himself had 
recently enforced this law. 

Her Residence. 

Near Endor such a woman lived. There is a 
Hebrew tradition, mentioned by Jerome, that she 
was the mother of Abner, and that because of her 
relationship to him she escaped the general mas- 
sacre of the necromancers at the hands of Saul. 
Let us get the scene clearly in mind. The armies 



S8a OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

are in full sight of each oilier; between them lies 
a part of the historic plain of Esdraelon. The 
sight of the Philistines filled Saul with fear, and 
so we read that "his heart trembled greatly." 
He is alone in his camp. Neither David, Samuel, 
nor God was now on his side. Neither by dreams, 
Urim, nor prophets would the Lord give him any 
answer. His suspense was terrible. If an an- 
swer will not come from heaven, perhaps one will 
come from hell. Look at the place as travellers 
see it to-day. A short ride from Nain brings us 
to Endor; the word means the " Spring of Dor." 
This spring has made the place habitable through 
all the centuries. Here are found to-day a few 
squalid people in their huts of stone and earth. 
Here are also some remarkable caves; enter these 
eaves. Behold this one; it is roomy, and in it 
observe almost at any moment women filling their 
water-skins or jars. The walls of this cave are 
old, seamed, and weird. It is the traditional 
place of the abode of the witch of Endor, whom 
Saul came to consult. Wretched old women may 
still be seen coming out of their holes or caves to 
stare at strangers as they approach. It is no diffi- 
cult task to imagine that one of these hags repre- 
sents the old witch, who has made the place 
famous through all the centuries since Saul's visit. 
Saul's journey was a perilous one; but the out- 
ward danger was nothing compared to the horror 
of great darkness which filled his soul. We can 
still trace the road which he took. He must have 



DID SAMUEL APPEAR WHEN SUMMONED? 383 

crossed the plain, gone round the left flank of the 
enemy, ascended the ridge of Little Hermcn, and 
then have gone down a steep descent to Endor. 

Meaning of the Appearance. 

Was the scene which followed a genuine appa- 
rition or a vulgar imposture? Volumes have been 
written in answer to that question. Many cir- 
cumstances suggest that it was an imposture. 
Saul was in exactly the frame of mind which ex- 
posed him to an imposition ; he was weak, excit- 
able, and superstitious. He came to this woman 
by night ; he sees her alone, his attendants being 
absent although near at hand. It is easy to sup- 
pose that one of his servants had agreed with the 
woman to personate Samuel. The narrative 
shows us that Saul did not see- any appearance of 
Samuel. From this supposed ghost he learned 
nothing which he might not have learned from 
his attendants, except the words : " To-morrow 
shalt thou and thy sons be with me"; and atten- 
tion has been called by several critics to the fact 
that the word translated " to-morrow" is very am- 
biguous, and often means the future indefinitely. 

But others believe that Samuel did actually 
appear to Saul; and possibly it will be admitted 
that the narrative suggests the hypothesis of 
some kind of apparition. Joscphus pronounces a 
labored eulogy on the woman. But the literal 
appearance of Samuel, it may be said in reply, is 



384 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

inconsistent with all which we know of the dead. 
Can the dead assume a corporeal shape? Can 
they converse and perform other acts of living 
beings? Can we suppose that the spirits of de- 
parted saints are amenable to the call of every 
old witch who chooses to dupe gullible men and 
women? Such a thought is incredible. Heaven 
would offer few attractions if saints like Samuel 
are to be called back to earth by watches like the 
woman of Endor. Others have suggested that 
the woman induced Satan or some other evil 
spirit to personate Samuel. But what right have 
we to assume that any person has such power 
over Satan? What right have we to assume that 
Satan has any power over, or any relation to, de- 
parted saints like Samuel? This theory is not 
encouraging to saints as they leave this earth. 

Is it not better to suppose that God permitted 
a divine impression to be made, partly upon the 
senses of Saul and partly upon those of the 
an, that Saul might be once more rebuked 
for his many departures from God? As we care- 
fully read the narrative we discover that Samuel 
appeared before the woman had performed any of 
her tricks of juggler)'. When she saw Samuel she 
utterly amazed and cried out w 7 ith a loud 
id thus she appears to have been as much 
startled as was Saul himself. There seemed to 
have been no magical formulae employed to cause 
the appearance, or to give her ground to affirm 
an appearance. God for wise purposes seems to 



DID SAMUEL APPEAR WHEN SUMMONED? 3^5 

have interposed, and to have given the woman a 
vision of the presence of Samuel ; in this sense that 
presence was real to her, and through her state- 
ment real to Saul. God in a similar way moved 
upon the mind of Balaam so that he was obliged 
to bless those whom Balak desired him to curse. 
The hearts of all men and women are under the 
power of God ; and He can overrule the evil of 
men for good. The woman believed that she saw 
Samuel, but Saul saw nothing. He simply lis- 
tened to the woman's description of a god-like 
figure of an aged man wrapped in the royal cloak 
or sacred robe, an appearance like that of gods, 
and then Saul fell the whole length of his gigantic 
stature on the ground, and so remained until the 
woman and her servants forced him to take nour- 
ishment. The woman was an impostor, and Saul 
was in a sense her victim, but God overruled the 
duplicity of the one and the superstition of the 
other for the accomplishment of His divine pur- 
poses. 

The Sad Ending. 

Thus Saul heard his death-knell rung from the 
world of spirits. Back through the darkness he 
goes with his sorrowful heart wellnigh broken in 
his bosom. What a night he must have passed! 
The day dawns, and soon he is rushing into battle. 
The Philistines poured down the hill on the one 
side, and the Israelites were forced up the hill 
slopes. The battle was sore against Saul; the 
archers hit him, and he was mortally wounded. 
25 



o 



S6 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTLES. 



He fought with the valor of despair. At his 
feet Jonathan and his other sons lay dead. Saul 
sought death, but it came not to his relief. He is 
faint and dizzy with the darkness and weakness of 
the approaching end. Fearing that he might be 
the sport of the Philistines if captured, he begs 
his armor- bearer to thrust him through with the 
sword. But respect for his fallen master pre- 
vents the servant from granting this boon. Be- 
hold Saul fixing his sword into the blood-stained 
ground, and see him falling upon it with the 
courage of despair ! Now he lies in pain smeared 
with his own blood. A wild Amalekite, wander- 
ing over the upland waste seeking plunder, sees 
the dying king and at that king's request he puts 
him out of pain, giving him the coup de grace. 
He then took off the royal diadem and bracelet 
and carried them with the news of Saul's death 
to David. The Philistines found the body on the 
morrow, and stripped and decapitated it. The 
armor was sent into the Philistine cities, and ap- 
parently deposited in a temple at Bethshan ; and 
on the walls of the same city was hung the naked 
and headless body of Saul, together with the 
corpses of his three sons. The body was removed 
from Bethshan by the gratitude of the inhabitants 
of Jabesh Gilead, who did not forget the kindness 
done them by Saul in the beautiful days of his 
early kingship. They came over the Jordan by 
night, took down the bodies, burned their flesh, 
and then buried the bones under a tamarisk at 



DID SAMUEL APPEAR WHEN SUMMONED? 387 

Jabesh. David finally removed Saul's ashes and 
those of Jonathan to their ancestral sepulchre at 
Zelah in Benjamin. 

There is no more melancholy character in Bible 
history than that of Saul. There was in him much 
that elicited admiration and evoked enthusiasm. 
But his rashness was controlled neither by sense 
nor conscience. The naturally fierce spirit of 
the tribe of Benjamin developed in him into 
uncontrollable ferocity. The naturally strong- 
affection manifested toward David and Jonathan 
was perverted into bitter wrath, which finally de- 
veloped into insanity. The zeal which was un- 
controlled became disobedience toward God, and 
this disobedience was the cause of all his disasters. 
Those who reject God will believe in witcnes. 
Men who are too incredulous to believe in the 
Bible will believe in the ravings of ignorant, vul- 
gar, and lying spiritual mediums and fortune- 
tellers. There is no depth too low for men who 
turn away from God, from purity, from truth, 
and from the Bible. The whole law of God is 
summed up by the divine Lord in the two great 
principles which are universal as gravitation and 
eternal as God: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy 
God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and 
with all thy might. This is the first and great 
commandment. And the second is like unto it; 
thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these 
two commandments hang all the law and the 
prophets." 



XXIII. 

DID TWO SHE-BEARS DESTROY FORTY- 
TWO CHILDREN? 



XXIII. 

DID TWO SHE-BEARS DESTROY FORTY- 
TWO CHILDREN? 

The narrative of this incident in the life of 
Elisha is found in 2 Kings ii. 23-25. The belief 
that two she-bears, as a part of the curse of Elisha 
on the derisive children at Bethel, utterly de- 
stroyed forty-two of these young people has 
greatly perplexed many Bible readers, and has 
utterly offended others, who desire to accept un- 
questioningly the Bible narrative. Recently at a 
great assembly of Sunday-school teachers in this 
city a rector of one of the churches unreservedly 
affirmed that this incident was not authentic, that 
it was an interpolation, and that, without the 
slightest doubt, the event never occurred. His 
affirmations and the doubts engendered in the 
minds of many Christian people are largely, if 
not entirely, caused by a misinterpretation of the 
ancient story. It is most unfortunate that many 
readers of the Bible have confounded false inter- 
pretations with true revelations; it ought to be 
clearly seen that their objections are not really 
against the Bible narrative, but against incorrect 
explanations of that narrative. 

Let us " fetch a compass" and approach this in- 



39- OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES: 

cident so that its salient features may be discov- 
ered and emphasized. Elisha was the successor 
of Elijah as the leader in the prophetical office. 
As such a leader it was fitting that he should visit 
the school of the prophets which was at Bethel. 
This place, it will be remembered, was then a 
chief seat of the illegal and idolatrous calf wor- 
ship. Elisha is on his way from Jericho to Mount 
Carmel as he visits Bethel. In company with 
Elijah he had made his last visit to that historic 
town, when these two famous men were taking 
their memorable journey before Elijah's transla- 
tion. We now approach the story at which many 
have taken offence. They have considered it un- 
worthy of the great prophet ; they have even de- 
clared that it was immoral on Elisha's part to 
pronounce a curse on these derisive youths. As 
Elisha approaches Bethel we see these youths 
clustered near the entrance to the town, as is the 
manner of the idle crowds in Palestine to this 
day. The incident which is about to occur is 
recognized at once as altogether unlike the life 
and spirit of Elisha, and as more nearly resem- 
bling those of Elijah. We have here the one case 
of severity in a life remarkable for its gentleness 
and beneficence ; but a clear understanding of the 
facts in the case will remove many of the difficul- 
ties with which the story is associated in the 
minds even of devout readers of the Bible. 



DID SHE-BEARS DESTROY CHILDREN? 393 

Not Irresponsible Children. 

We are not for a moment to suppose that these 
derisive youths were little boys, merely irrespon- 
sible children, indulging in a childish prank as 
Elisha approached the town. If we examine 
closely the words which they uttered, as well as 
the conduct which they manifested, we shall 
clearly see that their abusive epithets were not 
born of a mere childish freak. They knew well 
what they were doing; they belonged to a city 
which was the centre of an abominable apostasy. 
Because of its bad pre-eminence Bethel, meaning 
" house of God," was called Bethaven, meaning 
14 house of the idol. " These youths incarnated the 
spirit and manifested the temper which we might 
naturally expect from the offspring of confirmed 
and aggressive apostates from God. They were 
not, as already affirmed, irresponsible little chil- 
dren. The objectors to this narrative generally 
assume that these were children, perhaps from six 
to ten years of age ; but nothing could be farther 
removed from the facts in the case. The original 
terms are nearim ketanim, which may mean young 
men in the strength and vigor of their early man- 
hood. Naar, the singular form of the word of 
which nearim is the plural, signifies not only a 
child, but a young man, a servant, a soldier, one 
actually fit to go out to battle. Isaac is called 
naar when it is believed he was twenty-eight 
years old; and Joseph was also called by this 



394 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

name when, according to sonic authorities, he was 
thirty-nine years old. The word is applied to the 
soldiers who served as a body-guard to Ahab. 
It is also applied to Solomon when he was at least 
twenty years old, at the time when he began to 
reign; and Jeremiah uses the word of himself 
when he was ealled to be a prophet. Those who 
translate the original terms by the phrase " young 
people" are probably entirely correct. It is quite 
certain that the terms could appropriately be used 
of those who had reached the period of early 
manhood, and who might be of different ages 
within that limit. We still speak of the Hebrews 
as the "children of Israel"; and different words 
in the Hebrew translated children have a great 
breadth of meaning. 

It is thus evident that those who mocked Elisha 
were fully accountable for their abusive and ir- 
reverent language. If this fact had been held 
constantly in mind it would have entirely dis- 
armed many of the severest critics of this ancient 
story. They have, as already implied, supposed 
that these were thoughtless, sportive, prankish, 
and merely fun-loving little children. Because 
of this miseonecption as to their age the critics 
have been disposed to consider that their offence 
was very light, and so their punishment was 
extremely severe. Thus the opposers of the 
narrative have affirmed, because of these miscon- 
ceptions, that there was no proper proportion be- 
tween the crime committed and the punishment 



DID SHE-BEARS DESTROY CHILDREN? 395 

inflicted. It has thus come to pass that rather 
than believe that divine revelation was responsible 
for so great an injustice many earnest Christians, 
as well as hostile critics, have rejected the narra- 
tive as an unauthoritative tradition or an unfor- 
tunate interpolation. 

Meaning of the Insolent Epithet. 

"Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald 
head." The original words thus translated are 
aleh karcacli, and they are the language of gross- 
est insult. Some have supposed that these 
words are equivalent to, " Ascend, thou empty 
skull, to heaven," implying that these youths 
knew of Elijah's translation. If this be the 
meaning, their language was blasphemy against 
God, and the punishment of these Bethelite idol- 
aters was light compared with their crime. If 
this be the significance of the language, then 
great scorn is cast upon the ascension of Elijah. 
But this is probably not the correct interpreta- 
tion. Many authorities affirm that the word 
translated " go up" does not mean "ascend," in 
the sense in which the ascension of Elijah took 
place. In addition to this consideration, it is not 
at all probable that these young people could have 
heard at this time of the ascension of Elijah. 
The language of the sixteenth verse clearly sug- 
gests that even the disciples of the prophet had 
not yet learned of the translation of their great 
master. 



39<> OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

Let us get the scene clearly in mind. We see 
these young Bethelite defamers clustered about 
the entrance to their city. They behold Elisha 
at a distance as he approaches; they recognize 
him by the prophet's mantle. It was probably 
the mantle which Elijah had worn, and which he 
had left behind him as he ascended; it was, there- 
fore, in a peculiar sense the symbol of the pro- 
phetic office. They recognized Elisha as an ear- 
nest opponent of the calf worship to which they 
were devoted, and of which Bethel in a special 
sense w r as the headquarters. They watch Elisha 
ascending the hill and approaching their city. 
They have come out probably as an organized 
band ; they certainly were a numerous group, for 
if forty-two were injured by the bears there must 
have been more than that number in the entire 
company. They now call to Elisha in mockery, 
Aleh karcacli, " Go up, thou bald head." It is as if 
they had said, u Be off, thou prophet of God; we 
do not want your presence in our city; let us be 
rid alike of God and His prophet." The word 
which is here translated " bald head" is a peculiar 
term, and it strictly describes shortness of hair at 
the back of the head; it is distinct from another 
term which describes baldness at the front of the 
head. The term does not necessarily affirm actual 
baldness. These youths could not notice the con- 
□ of Elisha in that regard, as they were now 
Seeing him at a distance. It is true that Elisha 
might have been prematurely bald. We know, 



DID SHE-BEARS DESTROY CHILDREN? 397 

however, that he lived long after this event ; but 
iiis baldness, if it existed, as already suggested, 
could not have been observed by these youths 
when they uttered their opprobrious language. 
It is quite well known that there could have been 
no artificial baldness of the head caused by shav- 
ing, as the law forbade those who were conse- 
crated to the service of God from shaving the hair 
of the head. Probably the language attributed 
some form of moral culpability to Elisha; for 
baldness was often regarded as the sign of leprosy, 
or as the result of some form of moral dishonor. 
The epithet was, therefore, implicative of moral 
disgrace, and was thus a great reproach to Elisha 
as a man of God. Attention has been called to 
the fact that the tonsure among the Roman priests 
was long considered in many countries not as a 
mark of consecration and holiness, but rather as 
a symbol of moral impurity. It is absolutely cer- 
tain that the language applied to Elisha was the 
keenest sort of scornful epithet when uttered 
against him as a prophet of the true God. We 
'have not, therefore, here an exhibition of the 
mere wantonness of ordinary irreverence of boys 
for age or worthy character; we have rather a 
premeditated dishonor and a stinging insult to 
Elisha as the prophet and minister of the most 
high God. The scorn of these wicked youths was 
not so much against Elisha as a man, but upon his 
calling as a prophet. These defamers were de- 
spising Jehovah Himself. Elisha was simply the 



39 s OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

ambassador of God, and as such God ratlier than 
Elisha was the object of insult. His short- 
trimmed locks differed so widely from the shaggy 
hair of Elijah, which streamed down his shoulders, 
that the youths considered him and his claims to 
prophetship on that account, as well as because 
of their aversion to God and His worship, as a fit 
subject for denial and insult. We have thus dis- 
honor cast upon God, and upon the office of 
prophet in the caustic language hurled at Elisha. 

Elisha's "Curse." 

This part of the narrative has been subjected to 
severe criticism. We must not suppose that 
Elisha in a petulant humor, and certainly not in 
the spirit of personal revenge, declared God's 
punishment of the sin committed. As God's 
prophet he was making his first appearance in 
Bethel. He could not allow this open mockery 
to pass in silence. Had he permitted these boys 
to go unrebuked he would have practically denied 
his holy calling, and would have dishonored his 
divine Master. Great Britain and the United 
States cannot allow any form of dishonor to be 
given to their ambassadors in any land; for these 
ambassadors represent the dignity, honor, and 
power of their respective governments. Elisha 
was the representative of the great God in the 
midst of the worshippers of calves, and the honor 
of God was involved in the honor of His prophet. 



DID SHE-BEARS DESTROY CHILDREN? 399 

But what do we mean by Elisha's curse? What 
did Elisha do? Certainly he did nothing more 
and nothing other than to declare the divine judg- 
ment on the wicked spirit and language of these 
youths. He spoke in the name of the Lord, 
beshem JcJwvah, by the name or authority of 
Jehovah. It is certain that Elisha had no power 
in or of himself to inflict the punishment which 
came upon these deriders of God; he could not 
cause bears to come out of the wood. All that 
Elisha could do was to declare the punishment 
upon these sinful youths; and certainly Elisha 
could do nothing less. It is to be said regarding 
this part, and all parts of the narrative, that pos- 
sibly something is omitted in the record as we 
have it, or some expression has greatly changed 
its meaning since the record was made, and so 
difficulties in the narrative are multiplied. It is 
almost certain that if additional facts were given 
all apparent disproportion between the offence 
and the punishment, and regarding every other 
difficulty in the narrative, would entirely disap- 
pear. 

The Punishment Inflicted. 

What was the punishment thus inflicted on 
these derisive and irreverent youths; r We are 
told that there " came forth two she-bears out of 
the wood and tare forty and two children of 
them." To this hour, as many travellers have 
observed, the road to Bethel winds up the defile, 



400 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

and under the hill there are ruins which are sup- 
posed to he those of Ai. There are still some 
trees found in this vicinity; but in Elisha's day 
the neighborhood was marked by a thick forest 
which was the home of wild beasts. We are now 
dealing, let it be carefully remembered, with the 
judgment of God which befell these depraved 
youths. God had distinctly said : " I will also send 
wild beasts among you, which shall rob you of 
your children and destroy your cattle, and your 
highways shall be desolate." When did these 
bears come forth in relation to the time of the com- 
mittal of the offence by these young people? We 
are not told ; the time may have been long after- 
ward. Regarding this matter it is impossible to 
make an affirmation. But frankness compels us 
to say that the natural impression of the narrative 
is that this result happened soon after the mock- 
ery by the youths took place. Why are we dis- 
tinctly told that the instruments of the punish- 
ment were " she-bears"? There must be a reason 
for this characterization, otherwise any bears 
might have served the divine purpose in the in- 
fliction of merited punishment. We know that 
she-bears are particularly fierce; especially when 
robbed of their whelps are they peculiarly raven- 
ous. To this fact frequent reference is made in 
Scripture. It is not at all impossible that these 
forty-two youths who were thus injured, in a 
spirit of recklessness while employed in the wood 
may have robbed these bears of their young. 



DID SHE-BEARS DESTROY CHILDREN? 4° I 

The bears having" been robbed may have been in 
the track of these youths at the time they insulted 
the prophet. God's providence easily could have 
ordered this natural occurrence so as to give it the 
effect of a divine cause, as indeed it was. Accord- 
ing to this conjecture, the bears were filled with 
wrath for the loss they had sustained, and the jus- 
tice of God readily could guide them to the group 
of the insulting and blasphemous youths. 

But what was the extent of the punishment in- 
flicted? Much depends, in the correct interpreta- 
tion of the narrative, upon a right answer to this 
question; and at this point careless readers and 
traditional interpreters have greatly erred. They 
assume that forty-two of these youths were killed. 
How do we know that they were killed? It ought 
to be constantly affirmed that it is not asserted in 
this narrative that these bears ate forty-two, or 
two, or even one of these reviling young people. 
The word means only that the bears rent, or tore, 
to a greater or less degree, forty-two of these in- 
solent youths. The word is used with consider- 
able breadth of meaning in different connections. 
Perhaps nothing more is asserted than that the 
flesh was torn, possibly only the clothing; and 
there is a bare possibility that simply the group 
was torn asunder, scattered pell-mell in every 
direction; although the special references to the 
forty-two would indicate that something happened 
to them which did not occur to others of the num- 
ber. The natural impression is that an injury of 
26 



402 OLD TESTA M EXT DIFFICULTIES. 

some serious kind was inflicted, although its ex- 
tent cannot be accurately learned from the word 
employed ; but it is absolutely certain that it is 
not here affirmed that even one child was killed. 
This fact ought to be emphasized whenever the 
story is discussed. It is a thousand pities that 
meanings have been put into this word u tare" 
which it will not bear and which its connections 
nowhere suggest. The true explanation of the 
word tare relieves the narrative of the supposed 
disproportion between the crime committed and 
the punishment inflicted. 

Lessons. 

This story of the olden time is suggestive of les- 
sons for modern life and daily duty. It is always 
a serious thing to reproach any person for infirmi- 
ties or deformities. It is still more so to attribute 
physical or moral defects where they do not exist. 
Those who reproach a man because he is a servant 
of the most high God blaspheme God whose ser- 
vant he is. There are times when righteous wrath 
is not only justifiable but its absence would be 
culpable. The nobler the soul and the purer the 
heart the more quickly will they flash out against 
injustice to God or man, and against moral wrong 
wherever found. God always has at hand the 
means of punishing the guilty. He has hidden 
resources in the soil to destroy the doomed cities 
of the plain. lie has bears in the woods in leash 
waiting for the command to injure irreverent 



DID SHE-BEARS DESTROY CHILDREN? 4°3 

youths. He has in earth and air, in sea and sky, 
forces of nature which in harmony with natural 
law will inflict inevitable punishment upon all the 
violators of His law. No wicked words, no irrev- 
erent acts, no unholy thoughts escape the notice 
of the great God of heaven and earth. When the 
furious Saul persecuted the believers in Jesus he 
persecuted Jesus Himself. He who defames the 
prophets of God, or offends even the little ones 
who believe in Jesus, strikes a blow at the majesty 
of heaven and gives sorrow to the heart of the lov- 
ing Saviour. God's feeblest saints are dear to 
Him as the apple of the eye ; the names of His 
lowliest children are written in the palms of His 
hands, and every time the hands are opened He 
sees their names, and as often as the hands are 
closed all the forces of heaven and earth are em- 
ployed for their protection. 



XXIV. 
THE DESTRUCTION OF THE CANAANITES. 



XXIV. 

THE DESTRUCTION OF THE CANAAN- 

ITES. 

WAS the destruction of the Canaanites justifia- 
ble? In the judgment of many earnest 
students, the moral difficulties in the Book of 
Joshua are greater than are the astronomical dif- 
ficulties. The destruction of the Canaanites by the 
command of God, and through the instrumentality 
of Joshua, has been a subject of frequent attacks 
by infidels upon the morality of the Bible and upon 
the character of God. We all know that even the 
most earnest believers are often perplexed by the 
moral problems arising out of this subject and de- 
manding solution. Why did God command, or 
even permit, this destruction? How could such 
massacres occur without utterly demoralizing the 
people responsible therefor? How could a book 
claiming to be divine even seem to indorse such 
terrible slaughters? These questions demand our 
careful consideration, and to them alleviative an- 
swers can be given. 

Character of the Age. 

The age was one in which might made right. 
God has revealed Himself to men in sundry parts 



408 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

as men were able to receive the revelation. That 
God commanded the extermination of the Canaan- 
ites is most certain. In Deuteronomy we read: 
"Thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth; 
but thou shalt utterly destroy them," and the rea- 
son assigned for this command is, " That they 
teach you not to do after all their abominations." 
Is such a command in harmony with the divine 
attributes of justice and mercy? God has to do — 
it is said reverently — the best He can with the 
material in His hand. The age of Joshua was 
characterized by great ignorance of God. Thus 
there was a low ethical standard among men. 
Men were savage and brutal ; acts were then per- 
mitted, and even commanded, which would have 
been utterly prohibited under the Gospel dispen- 
sation. Men had not then learned to say : " Our 
Father, who art in heaven"; and being ignorant 
of the Fatherhood of God, they were correspond- 
ingly ignorant of the brotherhood of man. The 
spirit of mercy inculcated by Christ was entirely 
unknown in that rude time. It is quite unfair, 
as we shall later fully see, to carry back from the 
Xew Testament the morality there taught, and 
apply it to the conduct and character of men who 
did not have the full and blessed light of this 
highest revelation of God. It was also a time 
when property belonged to communities rather 
than to individuals. Communities were, there- 
fore, held responsible for the acts performed by 
their representatives. Punishment of nations 



DESTRUCTION OF THE CANAANITES. 4°9 

was in harmony with the forms of justice then 
prevailing. Joshua believed himself to be the 
minister of God in the punishment of the Canaan- 
ites. He was what the courts and officers of the 
law are in our day. Have they right to pro- 
nounce judgment and to take life? Joshua had a 
higher right in both respects; he was God's di- 
rect instrument. The Israelites were in a sense 
responsible for the morality of the Canaanites; 
and frequent rebukes by God were administered 
to the Israelites for not having more fully obeyed 
His command in the punishment of His and their 
enemies. 

It was also the practice in that day among all 
nations to put to death all prisoners taken in war. 
The humanity of our time is the development of 
thousands of years of Christian teaching. It 
must ever be borne in mind that the commands 
of God through Moses were greatly in advance of 
the moral education of the world at that time. 
Never was a leader of conquering armies less 
governed by selfish motives and unholy ambitions 
than was the brave and noble Joshua. Compared 
with Alexander the Great, Caesar, Charles V., 
Philip II., or Napoleon, Josuha appears conspicu- 
ous for noble character, selfless motives, and relig- 
ious consecration. Men must always be judged 
with reference to the standard of morality of the 
times in which they lived. Moses and Joshua 
were far in advance of the moral standard of their 
age ; they were the unworldly and godly men of 



410 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

their time. The charge rightly made against Co- 
lumbus is, that he lived below the highest stand- 
ard of his time ; a similar charge might be made 
against some of the practices of the Puritans, even 
after they came to the New World. All students 
of history must admit that the Jewish religion 
never introduced barbarism into the world; on 
the contrary, it greatly softened the spirit of cru- 
elty wherever it was established. Such conquer- 
ors as the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Persians 
were far less merciful than was Joshua. The 
Greeks and Romans stained the progress of their 
armies by crimes from which Joshua was entirely 
free. These classic nations did not hesitate to 
dedicate captive women to the impure worship of 
Aphrodite or Mylitta. The violation of women 
was almost universal in the case of towns sacked 
by armies of the earlier heathen, and even of 
later Christian days. Goths, Vandals, Huns, Bul- 
garians, and Turks, frequently surpassed Joshua 
in their pitiless cruelties. The conduct of the 
Duke of Alva, Philip of Spain, and the Pope of 
Rome in relation to the Netherlands was vastly 
more abominable, in their various forms of atroc- 
ity, than was the conquest of Joshua over the 
Canaanites. 

This a General Problem. 

How could God, we may ask, permit the bar- 
barities of pagan Rome against the early Chris- 
tians? How could God permit the still more 



DESTRUCTION OF THE CANAANITES. 411 

awful crimes of Papal Rome against those whom 
that church called heretics? How could God, in 
comparatively recent days, permit the satanic 
atrocities of the Spanish Inquisition? How could 
the nations of Europe and the republic of Amer- 
ica permit the hadean slaughter of the Armenians 
by the Kurds and the Turks? How could the 
American republic long, without effective pro- 
test, permit the nameless cruelties of a Weyler in 
Cuba^ We do not, indeed, answer one difficulty 
by suggesting other difficulties ; but we show, at 
least, that the problem is not peculiar to Joshua 
or the Bible. 

Let it be remembered that often apparent se- 
verity is 'the truest leniency in war. The storm- 
ing of Drogheda in Ireland by Cromwell has been 
fiercely criticised, but his act received justifica- 
tion not only in his own day, but in our time as 
well. Carlyle affirms that, terrible as was Oliver's 
surgery, it prevented greater suffering by bring- 
ing the war to a speedy end ; in this respect it 
was more merciful than would have been a gen- 
tler course. Cromwell was himself convinced 
that his severity " prevented the effusion of blood 
for the future." As a matter of fact, his stern- 
ness speedily ended the Irish war. The conduct 
of the British armies in suppressing the Sepoy 
atrocities in the Indian mutiny is a case in point. 
It was not in wanton cruelty that General Neill 
tied Sepoys to the mouths of cannons, and then 
fired the cannons, and shot the cruel wretches 



4i- OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

into fragments, thus inflicting apparently shock- 
ing forms of cruelty. He took advantage of a 
prevalent superstition among the Sepoys to the 
effect that the bodies thus mutilated would suffer 
additional humiliation and torture in the world to 
come. His act struck a degree of terror into the 
hearts of the rebels such as it is difficult for us to 
comprehend. It largely overthrew the rebellion. 
For every Sepoy thus put to death, it is safe to 
say that at least five hundred lives were saved. 
It is also certain that if the Israelites had fol- 
lowed up their first successes by similar crushing 
victories, they would have speedily become mas- 
ters of Palestine, and would thus have saved many 
lives and averted many moral evils. 

Guilt of the Canaanites. 

AVc ought also to remember that the Canaanites 
were guilty of the most abominable crimes con- 
ceivable by the human mind. They sinned 
against the light of nature, against the example 
of the patriarchs, and against the warnings given 
by God in the punishment of Sodom and Gomor- 
rah. In His commands against them God was 
but expressing 1 1 is indignation against horrible 
forms of vice. We have only to turn to the Book 
of Leviticus to see the' awful catalogue of abomi- 
nations, which, we are distinctly told, were com- 
mitted by the people of the land. Some forms of 
their crimes were long punishable by death in 
it Britain and in her colonies. This writer 



DESTRUCTION' OF THE CANAANITES. 4*3 

once saw a young* man on trial for his life under 
the forms of British law, charged with one of the 
crimes of which the Canaanites were guilty. No 
words are too strong to express the indignation 
which all true men must feel against the nameless 
crimes committed by these beastly Canaanites. 
Indeed, it is unfair to animals to put them in the 
same category with the inhabitants of the land 
which the Israelites came to conquer. When 
Israel refused to destroy these pamperers of vice, 
she lapsed into their idolatrous and lustful prac- 
tices; she even sacrificed children on the altars 
of Moloch. Thus it was that their religion was 
degrading beyond description. When fifteen 
hundred years later some of their practices were 
introduced into Rome, the satirists of that day 
regarded the advent of these vices as an enormous 
calamity. These Canaanites knew of God's won- 
ders in Egypt and of the victories over the kings 
of Gilead and Bashan. They knew that God had 
chastised the Hebrews for participating in the 
abominations of Baal-Peor. We know that Ra- 
hab informed the spies that she had known of 
God's mighty judgment; so, doubtless, did oth- 
ers. She repented and was saved, and perhaps a 
goodly number of others also repented and were 
saved. All might thus have been saved. God 
might indeed have punished the Canaanites by 
the operation of natural laws ; He does punish in 
that way violators of moral laws in our day. No 
man can escape these laws; they follow him as 



414 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

docs his shadow. But if God had punished the 
Canaanites by epidemics, by pestilence, or by 
some other display of His righteous wrath, His 
abhorrence oi sin would not have been so clearly 
shown as when He used the Israelites as the in- 
struments of His righteous anger. Nature in- 
flicts its wrath now upon weak women and harm- 
less children, and whatever charge may be made 
against the God of revelation must also be made 
against the God of nature. 

A General Law. 

Let it further be remarked that the nation that 
will not conform to the highest civilization of its 
time w r ill by that civilization be destroyed. This 
statement is the formulation of a law universal as 
God and irresistible as gravitation. God was now 
about to introduce the fullest manifestation of His 
kingdom yet given to men; and He required a 
territory from which evil influences were absent 
for the display of His great purposes. Similar 
truths are illustrated in America. God had great 
purposes in the establishment of the American 
republic. But in order that Pilgrim and Puritan 
fathers might have an appropriate sphere for 
planting and developing the great principles of 
American civilization and Christianity, the Indian 
had to be driven back from his former hunting- 
ground. The process has continued until this 
day. The Indian's territory was demanded for a 



DESTRUCTION OF THE CANAANITES. 4*5 

higher civilization, and for that purpose, by va- 
rious providential combinations, it was taken. 
The Indian has been driven back and back almost 
to the other edge of the continent. The process 
will go on until he is either civilized or extermi- 
nated. Doubtless, great cruelties have been prac- 
tised against the Indian on our own continent; 
doubtless, solemn treaties have been broken, and 
the white man has been guilty of much injustice 
toward his red brother. Nevertheless there is 
divine justice and an inevitable necessity in the 
operation of the law that nations that will not 
submit to the highest civilization of their time 
shall by that very civilization be destroyed. The 
greatest good to the greatest number necessitates 
the execution of this apparently severe but uni- 
versal and eternal law. Dr. Arnold rightly 
teaches us that " The Israelites' sword, in its 
bloodiest executions, wrought a work of mercy for 
all the countries of the earth, to the very end of 
the world. " 

As a final consideration, it is to be remembered 
that there is an anger which is not sinful. In- 
deed, the tenderer men are the more righteously 
wrathful do they become against wrong wherever 
found. He is only a being of paste and putty 
whose anger does not flash out against certain 
crimes committed against God and man. Jesus 
was a terrible Preacher against the hypocrites of 
His day. There are times in which even the 
holiest souls find appropriate vehicles in the im- 



41 6 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

precatory Psalms for the expression of their high- 
est thought. Dean Stanley calls attention to the 
fact that during the Sepoy rebellion the Book of 
Joshua was read in the churches with a great 
sense of appropriateness. There is need to-day 
of certain phases of the moral indignation against 
evil expressed in many of the Psalms and illus- 
trated in the conduct of Joshua and the Israelites. 
Let us be modest in passing judgment upon those 
who had to deal with the abominable cruelties 
and indescribable impurities which the Moabites 
committed in honor of Chemosh, and the Philis- 
tines in honor of Dagon. Let us not be wiser 
than God. Only the man who is wiser, tenderer, 
purer, and holier than God may presume to criti- 
cise God. God had His purpose all through this 
bloody period. His people fought not simply 
against the enemies of Israel, but against the 
enemies of humanity. We to this hour are reap- 
ing good fruit from the seed which they sowed, 
though they often sowed it amid tears and blood. 



XXV. 

ARE THE IMPRECATORY PSALMS JUSTIFI- 
ABLE OR EVEN EXPLICABLE? 



XXV. 

ARE THE IMPRECATORY PSALMS JUS- 
TIFIABLE OR EVEN EXPLICABLE? 

By the Imprecatory Psalms we mean those 
psalms in which the author invokes curses upon 
his enemies, and does this in a real or apparent 
spirit of vindictiveness. In some of the psalms 
to which this title is applied the author seems to 
take positive delight in the suffering of his foes. 
Some psalms in their entirety are usually classed 
as imprecatory; and parts of other psalms bear 
this title. It is believed by competent critics that 
the psalms which are most intensely imprecatory 
bear strong marks of the authorship of David. 
The following are among the psalms or parts of 
psalms to which the title imprecatory is generally 
applied ; these are not, indeed, all the psalms that 
could be selected of this class, but they are fair 
specimens of the spirit and style of all the psalms 
to which this title can properly be given ; of the 
entire psalms usually classed as maledictory the 
following maybe named: Pss. xxxv. , lviii., lix., 
lxix., and cix. Parts of other psalms are usually 
placed in this category: Pss. iii. 7; v. 10; ix. 2- 
4; x. 15; xviii. 37-43; xxviii. 4; xxxi. 17; xxxv. 
3-8; xxxvii. 12-15; *L 14; Hi 5-7; lv. 9, J 5, 2 3; 



4^o OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

lviii. 6-10; lix. 12-15; bdii. 9-11; lxiv. 7-9; lxviii. 
2; lxix. 22-25; Ixxix. 12; lxxxiii. 9-17; cix. 6- 
15; cxxxvii. 7-9. In some of these passages, es- 
pecially cix. 6-1 1 and cxxxvii. 8, 9, the maledic- 
tory spirit is very marked. 

No one can deny that these portions of Holy 
Scripture have seriously perplexed devout readers, 
and that they have also furnished plausible objec- 
tions to those who deny the inspiration of these 
psalms. Some of these psalms breathe a spirit of 
revenge and malice apparently inconsistent with 
all our ideas of true religion ; indeed, some of them 
shock sensitive readers, and startle those who are 
not sensitive. It has been gravely proposed by 
men not lacking in devoutness that an expurgated 
edition of the psalter should be prepared for gen- 
eral use, an edition which should omit all psalms 
possessing this maledictory spirit. Various theo- 
ries have been propounded by scholars in different 
countries and centuries to explain the presence 
of these psalms, and portions of psalms, in a book 
claiming to be directly from God. No one will 
deny that the difficulty connected with their pres- 
ence in such a volume is real and great. Perhaps 
it is impossible entirely to remove these difficul- 
ties. Difficulties, however, of many kinds are 
not peculiar to the Bible as a revelation from 
God; difficulties are found in natural science, in 
mental philosophy, and in practical morals which 
we cannot entirely remove. But although all 
difficulties connected with the imprecatory psalms 



THE IMPRECATORY PSALMS. \2\ 

cannot be removed, it is quite certain that some 
really alleviative suggestions can readily be made. 

Alleviative Explanations. 

It is quite certain that some critics have greatly 
exaggerated the spirit of vindictiveness recog- 
nized by all in some parts of the psalter; but it 
ought to be borne in mind that really very few of 
the psalms possess this characteristic. Dean 
Stanley in his lectures on the Jewish church, vol. 
ii., p. 170, calls attention to the fact that out of 
one hundred and fifty psalms in the psalter, only 
four are specially marked as possessing a vindic- 
tive spirit. In this connection we ought to em- 
phasize the fact that much importance should be 
attached to the natural vehemence of expression 
among the Orientals, as compared with the habits 
of thought and language on the part of those liv- 
ing in cooler climates and possessing different 
characteristics. It is absolutely certain that much 
■that is supposed in these psalms to be harsh and 
vindictive may be referred to the spirit of the age 
in which the psalms were written, and to the char- 
acteristics of the writers themselv.es. Critics of 
all kinds of literature ought to judge an author 
by the standards of his own age and place, and 
not by standards of our time and place. We con- 
stantly apply these principles to the Greek and 
Latin poets, to the records of knight-errantry in 
the Middle Ages, to the language of Covenanters 



4 2 2 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

and Puritans, and, indeed, to authors of all times 
and places. It is certain that Biblical authors 
are equally entitled to the application of this prin- 
eiple of literary criticism. It is quite certain 
that often uneducated men who use rough and 
seemingly harsh words mean to express no more 
harsh and cruel feeling than other men express in 
the smooth tones and courtly phrases of a more 
refined culture. He is an unfair critic, to judge 
the subject purely on literary grounds, who re- 
fuses in his study of the imprecatory psalms to 
give due weight to the genius of Hebrew poetry 
and the spirit of the age in which David lived. 
The true critic will always strive to distinguish 
between an author's real meaning and the color 
which his mental habit, national education, and 
immediate environment give to that expression. 
Except this principle be constantly borne in mind, 
we shall pass an utterly false judgment on the 
Covenanters of Scotland and the Puritans both of 
Old and New England. David certainly is en- 
titled to a fair application of this conspicuously 
fair principle of literary criticism. We all know 
that the Oriental, even to this day, uses extremely 
strong language for the expression even of ordi- 
nary feeling and opinion. When Europeans 
would express the idea that God loves men, they 
i simple statement to that effect; but when 
the Asiatic prophet expresses the same idea he 
"Thy maker is thy husband"; and he 
further expresses the idea by referring to the joy 



THE IMPRECATORY PSALMS. 4 2 3 

of the bridegroom over the bride as illustrative 
of God's joy in His people. These statements are 
almost objectionable because of the amatory ele- 
ment which the Occidental discovers ; but the form 
of expression was most natural and proper to the 
Oriental. In like manner the Oriental expresses 
his sense of justice in language equally strong. 
The apparently terrific denunciations of the 
psalmist meant nothing more to him than lan- 
guage which we often use without offending the 
most sensitive readers. This principle of criti- 
cism ought carefully to be applied to the writings 
of all Oriental poets and prophets. Many oppo- 
nents of the Bible have been guilty of great un- 
fairness because of their failure to recognize this 
eminently appropriate principle in their interpre- 
tation of the psalter and other portions of the Old 
Testament. 

Some have found an alleviative interpretation 
in the opinion that some of the imprecatory psalms 
are predictive rather than maledictive. This in- 
terpretation implies that the imprecations state 
what would be rather than what the writer desired 
should be. But this view must not be pressed 
unduly. The more careful study of the Hebrew 
original in these recent times does not warrant 
this view, except possibly in a very limited appli- 
cation. The scholarship of an earlier day made 
some of the passages to be rendered in the future 
rather than in the imperative; possibly in some 
cases the laws of the Hebrew language will per- 



4^4 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

mit this interpretation. So far as this explana- 
tion is permissible, the idea is that the punishment 
denounced is what sinners deserved rather than 
what the writer desired on their account. This 
language is predictive rather than imprecative. 
It expresses what, in the operation of natural 
laws with which we are all familiar, is sure to fol- 
low a course of evil conduct. Sin will be followed 
by sorrow; what a man sows that shall he as- 
suredly reap. We cannot separate between sin 
and punishment; punishment will follow sin as 
the shadow follows substances in the sunshine. 
Rut even if this interpretation is applicable to a 
few passages the most serious difficulties still re- 
main, as this explanation will not meet all the 
cases. It is quite certain that in some passages 
there is an expression of feeling, of desire, of 
pleasure in the invocation of terrible calamities 
upon the enemies of the writer. This is at best a 
timid way of dealing with real difficulties. Can 
this vindictive spirit be reconciled with the char- 
acter of Christianity? Is it in harmony with any 
form of revealed religion? These are most seri- 
ous questions, and they deserve the most careful 
consideration. 

An alleviative interpretation has been sug- 
gested on the ground that the duty of forgiving 
enemies is not distinctly taught in the Old Testa- 
ment. But this is not a tenable position. The 
Jewish Scriptures condemn a spirit of revenge. 
It would be easy to quote passages from Exodus, 



THE IMPRECATORY PSALMS. 425 

Leviticus, Proverbs, and from still other portions 
of the Old Testament to show that even these 
Scriptures did enjoin the requiting of evil with 
good. It is also true that David recognized this 
obligation, and was himself frequently a noble il- 
lustration of the spirit of magnanimity toward his 
foes. It is to be said that in some cases the writer 
of these malefic passages merely records the feel- 
ings of others, and in those cases he is not to be 
held responsible for the language employed. 
This explanation covers a number of cases, and 
some of them those of the most serious character. 
The writer merely expresses the gratification 
which others would feel in seeing vengeance in- 
flicted on their enemies, even though that ven- 
geance should come in the most cruel forms. In 
these cases all that the writer, or the Spirit of in- 
spiration, is responsible for is the correctness of 
the record. The writer is merely telling the story 
of the cruelty of others, and is not expressing 
any cruel feelings of his own. In Genesis xxxiv. 
25-29, xlix. 6, 7, the inspired writer gives a record 
of the cruelty of the sons of Jacob; so in 2 Sam. 
xii. 31, we have simply a statement of the cruelty 
which had been inflicted and for which the writer 
had no responsibility whatever. One of the most 
startling of the imprecatory passages is the one 
in Psalm cxxxvii. 8, 9 ; this passage has shocked 
many devout students of the psalter; but it is 
simply a statement of the actual feelings of those 
who should wreak vengeance on Babylon. The 



126 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

pride and arrogance of Babylon had been so great 
that we can well suppose many who should see 
her terribly punished would have the utmost sat- 
isfaction, even though that punishment were sav- 
age and barbarous in the extreme. But there is 
nothing in this record necessarily to show that the 
author of the psalms rejoiced in the infliction of 
that punishment. This solution of the difficulty 
will certainly apply to some of the imprecatory 
passages. It is quite certain that Mr. Motley, in 
writing of the cruelties of Alva in the Nether- 
lands, or of the Inquisition in Spain, or any re- 
cent writer speaking of the satanism of Weyler in 
Cuba, must not be supposed as sympathizing with 
the cruelty which he describes. This explanation 
will not apply to all the objectionable passages, but 
it certainly does to a number of them, and is an 
explanation to which due weight should be given. 

Still Other Alleviations. 

It has been proposed by some writers to explain 
these imprecations on the ground that they are 
the language natural to the human heart, lan- 
guage which naturally and actually occurred to 
the mind of the psalmist but which is not com- 
mended to us for imitation. Inspiration is not 
omniscience; inspiration is not perfection. The 
spirit of inspiration is not responsible for wicked 
thoughts on the part of the psalmist, any more 
than it is responsible for wicked acts on the part 



THE IMPRECATORY PSALMS. 427 

of Abraham, Jacob, David, or Peter. The biog- 
raphy of other men in the Bible clearly shows 
that they were guilty of acts which must be con- 
demned even by their own standards of morality. 
If inspired men may do selfish and resentful acts, 
they may also speak passionate and unrighteous 
words. The Scripture is always honest in its 
statements even regarding eminent servants of 
God. It palliates nothing ; it dares tell the whole 
truth. Without doubt this illustration of truth- 
fulness on the part of the Bible is an element of 
its great power. It does not present to us the life 
of the most distinguished saint as free from 
struggles with sins and temptations. It does not 
give us the highest forms of religion conceivable, 
but it represents its noblest men as struggling with 
manifold temptations and so working out a noble 
character. The failings even of Moses, David, 
and Peter have given encouragement and inspira- 
tion to all subsequent ages, even as the heroic 
morality of Joseph and the unfaltering courage of 
Daniel have rebuked weakness and encouraged 
fidelity and loyalty. Thus the psalmist does not 
select simply his highest emotions and his noblest 
aspirations for exhibition in his writings ; but he 
gives a true picture of his own heart in its various 
struggles against evil and toward good. The 
psalmist was only partially sanctified. No true 
view of inspiration requires us to deny that vin- 
dictive feelings might arise in the mind of an in- 
spired poet and a partially sanctified king. The 



OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

• 
Bible frankly admits David's great sins. The re- 

ligious emotions of the best men are mingled with 

imperfections. The spirit of inspiration is not 

responsible for these feelings, any more than for 

the evil aets of those whose lives are recorded; it 
is responsible simply for a correct record of these 
feelings and aets. These portions of the writer's 
feelings are not given for our imitation. Inspira- 
tion is not sanctification. Balaam uttered true, 
glowing, and sublime prophecies, and yet Balaam 
was in many respects a bad man. No man will 
deny that such men as Augustine, Luther, Me- 
lanchthon, Calvin, Knox, and scores more in 
earlier and later days, were at times guilty of un- 
christian feeling and unholy action. It should 
constantly be borne in mind that perfection is un- 
known even among the greatest saints of all ages 
and climes. A man may be a true historian and 
not be in the full sense a true man. 

A very helpful alleviative interpretation is 
found in the fact that David identifies the enemies 
of God with his own enemies. The critics of 
these portions of the psalter have largely forgot- 
ten this fact, but it is a fact that ought never to 
be forgotten. David speaks not so much against 
the enemies of David as against the enemies of 
David's Lord. lie well expresses his own spirit 
when he says: "Do I not hate them, O Lord, 
that hate thee?" ik I hate them with perfect 
hatred; I count them mine enemies." The 
author of the article on the Psalms in Smith's 



THE IMPRECATORY PSALMS. 429 

Dictionary of the Bible, in illustrating this point. 
calls attention to the fact that even Catiline had 
insight enough to say, " An identity of wishes and 
aversions, this alone is true friendship." Apply- 
ing this test to David in his relations to God, we 
can see that the union between them was such 
that all God's enemies David regarded as his own 
personal foes. David was in a sublime sense 
God's representative; the honor of God's name 
and the glory of God's kingdom were in a marvel- 
lous way committed to the care of David. In re- 
quiting the wrongs of his Lord and King he for- 
got his own wrongs as committed against himself, 
and thought of them only as committed against 
his God. An American or British ambassador at 
a foreign court may entirely lose sight of an 
attack upon himself, and consider it simply as 
aimed at the government whose representative 
at that court he is. David's zeal for God made 
all God's enemies in some sense his own enemies. 
It has been well said, by the writer to which allu- 
sion has just been made, that it was when David 
felt God's honor to be insulted that he rose to so 
lofty a vengeance as to express himself thus : 

44 That thy foot may be dipped in the blood of thine enemies, 
And the tongue of thy dogs in the same." 

Many other similar examples of the manifesta- 
tion of this spirit could readily be given. David 
rises to his noblest strains of righteous wrath when 
he is defending God's honor and is entirely for- 



43° OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

getful of his own personal wrongs. It would be 
easy to quote passages from these psalms showing 
his kindness, gentleness, and forgiveness toward 
his ( wn foes. There is a striking- illustration of 
this spirit in Psalm xxxv. 12, 13: " They rewarded 
me evil for good to the spoiling of my soul. But 
as for me, when they were sick my clothing was 
sackcloth; I humbled my soul with fasting; and 
my prayer returned into mine own bosom." 

Two Strong Alleviations. 

We must recognize the fact that in the impreca- 
tory psalms a righteous indignation is often ex- 
pressed, a sense of outraged justice here finds 
voice. All true men must admit that there are 
times when the spirit of forbearance must give 
place to the spirit of righteous indignation. The 
holier the soul the hotter at times will be this spirit, 
and the stronger will be its expression. It has 
often been remarked that in the study of the Sa- 
tanic Inquisition in Spain, of the horrible St. 
Bartholomew massacre, and of the terrible Smith- 
field fires, even the gentlest spirit finds the im- 
precatory psalms an appropriate vehicle of ex- 
pression. The humblest and most devout saints 
in India during the Sepoy rebellion found solid 
comfort in reading these portions of the psalter. 
Many of us during the fearful massacres in Ar- 
menia and still later in Cuba sympathized with 
the spirit of these Christians in India, and found 



THE IMPRECATORY PSALMS. 43* 

corresponding comfort in these maledictory pray- 
ers. As one thinks of the devilish spirit of the 
liquor traffic he may without sin, ( in some mod- 
ified sense, use these psalms as expressive of 
his feeling. There is an indignation which is 
righteous ; there is an anger that is sinless. The 
holier the soul the greater will this indignant and 
righteous anger be. He is made of paste and 
putty whose spirit does not flame forth in indig- 
nant wrath against forms of sin unfortunately too 
common in every walk of life. It has been well 
said that David was the Milton and Cromwell of 
his time ; he fought the earthly battles of his Lord 
and Master. We do not feel that Milton showed 
an un-Christian spirit when, catching the echo of 
David's lyre, he sang: 

"Avenge, O Lord, thy slaughtered saints, whose bones 
Lie scattered on the Alpine mountains cold." 

We must also bear in mind that David was a 
magistrate, was a king, and was in a real sense 
the representative of God. It was a part of his 
function to discover and arraign the guilty and to 
dispense justice. We cannot deny that in certain 
conditions punishment is right. A law without a 
penalty is not law, but simply advice. Account 
for it as we may, there is something in our nature 
which approves of the infliction of penalty when 
crime has clearly been committed. The whole 
theory of government recognizes the necessity for 
arrangements for detecting and punishing crime. 



43« OLD TESTA ME XT DIFFICULTIES. 

We thus have an array of constables, jurymen, 
and judges. Is it not lawful for a detective, or a 
constable, or a keeper of a prison to pray that he 
may discover the guilty and inflict the appro- 
priate punishment? Could not a detective officer 
in his private devotions or at his family altar offer 
a prayer that he should be successful in discover- 
ing- and punishing fiendish criminals? Could not 
David appropriately offer a similar prayer? Is 
not his prayer in its essence simply that justice 
may be done and that righteous punishment may 
be inflicted? It cannot be proved that there is in 
the imprecatory psalms any more malice than 
might be found in the heart of an officer of the 
law even in our day when he is endeavoring to do 
his duty in capturing and punishing criminals. 
The nobler the student of Scripture the more 
readily will he see that even the imprecatory 
psalms have some place in human life, and so in 
divine revelation. It is not an evidence of a high 
spiritual conception that finds no place for the 
resistance to evil, and for the avengement of 
wrong, which is found in this portion of the 
psalter. All that is manliest in human nature and 
divinest in God will at times flame forth in de- 
nouncement of evil and in vindication of the right. 
It ought to be borne further in mind that what- 
ever difficulty exists regarding the imprecatory 
hs is a difficulty created by the Bible itself. 
The sacred writers have given us this record. It 
is clearly seen in the Bible that all its parts have 



THE IMPRECATORY PSALMS. 433 

their own method of denouncing sin. In the his- 
torical books sin is denounced by simply showing 
its effects in harmony with natural law. Its 
results in national character are seen in the loss 
of vigor and nobility, and in the final enslavement 
of the people. The prophets denounce it with 
tremendous rhetorical vigor. If one will read 
the anathemas of Isaiah, Amos, and other proph- 
ets with this thought in mind he will see that 
David's imprecations are comparatively mild and 
gentle. No one uttered more fearful " woes" than 
fell from the lips of the loving Saviour. He 
spoke with a breadth of application and intensity 
of meaning which David could not understand. 
The purer and diviner the character of Christ the 
severer and fiercer the imprecations He uttered. 
Let it then never be forgotten that David spoke 
rather of God's enemies than of his own. The 
Bible with the utmost candor gives us the record. 
Its writers indulged in no feelings which they 
were unwilling to record. If we condemn these 
imprecations, we ought to remember that the 
spirit which leads to their condemnation has come 
from the Bible itself. The Bible is one book ; all 
its parts are one revelation from God. We must 
judge its writings as a whole. Men and books 
must be criticised in their entirety. It is quite 
unfair to judge either by their beginning and not 
by their ending. Thus it will come to pass that 
the entire book, when rightly understood, is seen 

to be harmonious. 
28 



434 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

We have thus seen that there are many allevia- 
tions of these difficulties. The nobler the soul 
the more easy will he find it to interpret these 
imprecations. When right is on the cross and 
wrong is on the throne, when the wicked oppose 
and those who should be valiant for truth are 
silent, then noble souls in the fires of persecution 
catch the true spirit of the imprecatory psalms. 
In the day of peace and sunshine dilettante fol- 
lowers of Christ may seem shocked at the strong 
language and apparently vindictive spirit of these 
psalms ; but in the day of terrific trial between 
right and wrong, good and evil, Christ and Satan, 
a holy resentment may become the divinest of 
emotions. Let us make due allowance for the 
Orientalism in the diction of these imprecations, 
for the heroic spirit of resistance to evil in the 
heart of the psalmist, and for the sublime identi- 
fication of his enemies with God's foes, and many 
of these apparently insuperable difficulties will 
vanish. Let us not claim to be holier than was 
David, gentler than was Jesus, diviner than have 
been thousands of white-souled saints through the 
ages, who at times of righteous indignation have 
found these psalms in harmony with the tenderest 
love, the saintliest desire, and the holiest aspira- 
tion. 



XXVI. 
JONAH AND HIS BOOK. 



XXVI. 

JONAH AND HIS BOOK. 

No book in the Bible has been so vigorously 
assailed by infidels as the book of Jonah, and thus 
many of the most beautiful lessons which the 
book teaches have been entirely forgotten in the 
criticism to which it has been subjected. This 
story, regarded simply as literature, is one of the 
most interesting short stories in any language. 
No book of the Old Testament so clearly teaches 
the lesson of universal brotherhood as does the 
book of Jonah. In portions of the book of Isaiah 
this lesson is taught, but with nothing like the 
emphasis given it in the book of Jonah. God re- 
bukes the exclusiveness of the prophet and the 
narrowness of the Jews, and throws the mantle of 
His loving-kindness and forgiving mercy over the 
nation that cruelly hated the Jewish people. The 
lesson of human brotherhood taught in the book 
of Jonah anticipates the presentation of that great 
truth given by our Lord and by the Apostle Paul. 
In this respect the book of Jonah is unique among 
the books of the Old Testament. The great ma- 
jority of critics almost entirely overlook this sub- 
lime truth in their carping criticisms and cav- 



43 8 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

tiling disputations. Jonah was really the first 
foreign missionary; he carried the message of 
mercy to a heathen people. 

Groundless Reasoning. 

They are utterly at fault who affirm that if 
the historical character of the book of Jonah is 
disproved, then Christianity itself is destroyed. 
Those who so speak are guilty of unpardonable 
looseness of thinking. They practically affirm 
that if Jonah goes, the Bible goes and Jesus goes. 
No man is warranted in making so exaggerated 
and so reasonless a statement as that ; indeed, it 
is difficult to understand how a man with a grain 
of common sense in relation to such matters can 
make such a statement. Those who so affirm 
make the historical interpretation of the book of 
Jonah of equal importance with the divine char- 
acter and sacred mission of Jesus Christ. It used 
to be affirmed by men of this class that if it were 
shown that the world was not created in six lit- 
eral days of twenty-four hours each, then Genesis 
was overthrown, the Bible was disproved, and re- 
ligious faith was destroyed. It is rare to find any 
class of interpreters to-day who affirm that the 
world was made in six literal days. Perhaps each 
one of these creative days represented thousands, 
possibly millions, of years. But although we 
have changed our interpretation regarding the 
meaning of the word day, we have not lost our 



JONAH AND HIS BOOK. 439 

faith in spiritual realities or in the divine revela- 
tions given us in the Bible. There was a time 
when most interpreters of Scripture believed that 
the sun actually stood still in the heavens, at the 
command of Joshua; but man) r of the most de- 
vout and spiritual interpreters to-day believe, as 
is plainly stated in the narrative, that the descrip- 
tion is a quotation taken from the book of Jasher, a 
book probably made up of national, historical, and 
triumphal songs of patriotic heroes ; and that no 
such affirmation as that the sun stood still is made 
in the Bible narrative. We have unquestioning 
faith in God's miracles; but it is permissible 
to have but little regard for miracles which are 
the creations of extravagant commentators and 
unscholarly preachers. Several learned men have 
affirmed that merchants or Arabians, and not 
ravens, brought food to Elijah; by omitting, or 
slightly changing, the vowel points, which are 
admitted to have no great authority, the Hebrew 
letters may mean Arabians, or "merchants" or 
the "inhabitants of Oreb or Orbi." The word in 
the Hebrew is "Orebim." But should a man 
adopt any of these interpretations, we have no 
right to call him a disbeliever in the supernatural. 
Does a man who adopts this interpretation reject 
the Xew Testament and disbelieve in Christian- 
ity? John Jasper stands ready to charge with 
infidelity those who deny that " de sun do move." 
Augustine affirmed that the idea of an antipodes 
was unscriptural, for how could those who lived 



440 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

there sec the Lord when He should return to the 
earth? Once many churchmen believed that the 
earth stood still, and that the sun revolved around 
it ; and they thought a denial of that belief tended 
to disprove the Bible and to destroy Christianity. 
An " infallible" pope and the saered congregation 
persecuted Galileo and were ready to torture all 
opposers of their crude beliefs. Luther con- 
demned the Copernican system ; he thought " the 
upstart astrologer" was a fool and was teaching 
contrary to Scripture. Calvin also believed that 
faith in Copernicus was infidelity to Scripture. 
The Roman and the Lutheran churches practi- 
cally were the John Jaspers of an earlier day. 
Some evangelists and pastors of our day have 
fallen into false methods of interpretation. They 
have raised a false issue ; they have manufactured 
a test of fidelity to Scripture which exists only in 
their excited imagination or in their untrained rea- 
soning. It is extremely foolish for any man to say 
that if Jonah goes Jesus goes, and the Bible goes, 
and Christianity goes. I venture to affirm that our 
faith in Jesus Christ, and in a divine revelation, 
does not rest on the interpretation which we 
give to the book of Jonah, or to any other book 
of the Old Testament. As we shall see, there 
have been various theories of interpretation con- 
cerning this book; but whether we believe in the 
historical, the allegorical, or the parabolical inter- 
pretation, we do not thereby lose the symbolic 
and spiritual lessons which the book teaches; and 



JONAH AND HIS BOOK. 44 1 

we do not deny the authority of Jesus Christ in 
His interpretation of the book, and we certainly 
do not lose our faith in Christianity or revelation. 
It is quite certain that the chief value of this book 
in the time of our Lord was its symbolic signifi- 
cance rather than its historical reality. We may 
hold our belief that the book is truly historical, 
and yet guard ourselves against so unwise a prop- 
osition as that our faith in Jesus Christ depends 
upon the historicity, or upon any theory of inter- 
pretation, of the book of Jonah. 

r 

Theories of Interpretation. 

There have been several well-defined theories 
of interpretation of this book. Some have af- 
firmed that the entire narrative was a dream 
which Jonah had while asleep in the sides of the 
ship. This is certainly an easy method of dis- 
posing of all the difficulties which the narrative 
contains, but it probably suggests more difficul- 
ties of another kind that are found in the narra- 
tive as we now have it. Others have regarded 
the book purely as an allegory ; they have consid- 
ered it a parody upon, if not the original form of, 
various heathen fables, such as those of Arion and 
the Dolphin, or the wild adventures of Hercules. 
We know that Joppa and its vicinity were the 
home of many legends. The story of Androm- 
eda and Perseus is located at this place, as are 
others of a somewhat similar character. Even 



44* OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

if the book were a pure allegory, its spiritual les- 
sons, as already suggested, would still remain, 
and oir Lord's use of it as recorded in the 
twelfth chapter of Matthew would still be justi- 
fied. 

Many of the most orthodox interpreters have 
adopted the allegorical or dramatic interpretation 
of the Song of Solor^on,'but their orthodoxy in 
so doing has never been called in question. Sin- 
gularly enough the allegorical interpretation of 
the Song of Solomon has been considered as con- 
clusive evidence of orthodoxy ; but the allegorical 
interpretation of the book of Jonah these same 
exegetes consider rank heresy. A third theory is 
that Jonah when thrown into the sea was picked 
up by a ship having a fish for a figurehead and 
bearing the name of a fish. We know that it was 
common then, and is now, to give ships the names 
of animals of various kinds and to ornament them 
with figureheads representing these animals. Da- 
gon means a fish, and Dagon was the national 
idol of the Philistines, with temples at Gaza and 
Ashdod in this general vicinity. Dagon had the 
body of a fish and the head of a man. A German 
scholar has adopted this view and has argued at 
length in its favor. It is an interesting fact that 
Jonah's prayer, which, like Hannah's prayer, is 
rather a hymn of praise than a prayer, is uttered 
when he seems to have escaped from danger 
and not when he was in the midst of danger. 
This interpretation would make the prayer to 



JONAH AND HIS BOOK. 443 

have been offered after he was rescued from the 
sea and was safely aboard the ship. Akin to this 
interpretation is that which makes his rescue to 
have been due to a life preserver, or some similar 
means of escape. There are interpreters who 
affirm that the story has a historical basis, but 
with many fanciful and mythical additions; while 
still others believe that the story is purely moral 
and without any historical foundation. But quite 
recently another interpretation has been sug- 
gested. It is stated that the name Nineveh is 
no other than Ninua, or Nunu, which means 
"fish," and as the city was called the great city, 
its old Assyrian name was simply the Great Fish 
or the Fish City. To this day, it is said, the 
name on the monuments is represented by a fish 
in a basin or tank. This view would make Nine- 
veh itself the "great fish" that swallowed Jonah, 
and in crying to the Lord for deliverance he gave 
the city its old Assyrian name, praying to be de- 
livered from the " great fish." There is historical 
truth somewhere in these many interpretations. 
We can afford to be patient and to wait for fuller 
light. I am not disposed to give up the historic- 
ity ot the narrative. Very weighty scholarship in 
Germany, and to a very considerable extent in 
Great Britain and the United States, is still in 
favor of the historical reality of the narrative. 
This view is held by such men as Hess, Heng- 
stenberg, Baumgarten, Delitzsch, and by many in 
Britain and America of like broad learning and 



444 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

sound judgment. The fact is that the denial of 
the historical reality of the narrative involves 
difficulties as serious as its frank admission. 
There has been a vast deal of silly wit expended 
on this book as a "fish story" of the ancient time. 

Confirmatory Evidence. 

There is nothing whatever in the Old Testa- 
ment or the New to show that this narrative is a 
myth or a parable ; on the contrary, there is much 
to teach us that it is a record of an actual occur- 
rence. The prophet Jonah is referred to in 2 
Kings xiv. 25, and beyond question the prophet 
who gave his name to the book is the same to 
whom reference is there made. He was a proph- 
et of God in the reign of Jeroboam II. The 
word Jonah means " dove," and his father's name, 
Amittai, means "the truth of God." It is almost 
certain that there could not have been two proph- 
ets bearing the same name and sons of fathers 
of the same name, especially of names so sugges- 
tive and rare as these. Jonah was of Gath-Hepher, 
a town in lower Galilee in Zebulon. It has been 
suggested that Jonah was a child when Homer 
sang his rhapsodies on the shores of the Mediter- 
ranean ; that he was a contemporary of Lycurgus, 
the Spartan lawgiver, and that he was the senior of 
Romulus by one century and of Herodotus by four 
centuries. A criticism has been made on the book 
of Jonah because it is written in the third person. 



JONAH AND HIS BOOK, 445 

but this is the very puerility of criticism. We 
know well that the commentaries of Caesar and 
the Anabasis of Xenophon were also written in the 
third person. It has been charged that the style 
of the book threw doubt upon its reality, but a 
more careful scholarship shows that it is written 
in pure and simple Hebrew. Indeed, almost all 
the more genuinely critical examinations of these 
details are confirmatory of the historicity of the 
narrative. 

This is especially true in its relations to Nine- 
veh. The King of Nineveh at the time of Jonah's 
visit is supposed to have been Pul, and Layard 
places him at 750 b.c. Nineveh was the metrop- 
olis of ancient Assyria, and was called by the 
Greeks and Romans the Great Ninus or Ninua. It 
was probably situated on the east bank of the Ti- 
gris, opposite the modern Mosul. Recent excava- 
tions confirm statements made in the books of 
Jonah and Nahum regarding the immense size of 
Nineveh. These discoveries quite justify the 
statement that it contained more than one hun- 
dred and twenty thousand young children, thus 
indicating that it had a population of at least half 
a million. The people were wealthy and warlike. 
Nineveh was long the mistress of the East. With- 
in the last generation Layard, Botta, Smith, and 
others have been exploring its mounds and have 
made discoveries confirmatory of the Bible nar- 
rative. They have found sculptured memorials 
containing the actual Assyrian accounts of events 



44 6 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES, 

recorded in the books of Kings and Chronicles. 
They make mention of the names of Jehu, Heze- 
kiah, Omri, and also of various cities in Judeaand 
Syria. They also give Sennacherib's own ac- 
count i)f his invasion of Palestine. It is as sur- 
prising as gratifying that these long-buried tablets 
are confirmatory, even in minute details, of the 
statements contained in the Bible. 

Additional Confirmation. 

Even what is said in the book of Jonah regard- 
ing" the gourd which so suddenly sprang up is 
fully corroborated by the rapid production of the 
plant known as the Palma Christi. This plant is 
found with broad leaves, giving a dense shade and 
supporting itself on its own stem. It is still al- 
most a miracle in its wellnigh instantaneous 
growth. It is found in many parts of Arabia, 
Syria, and India. It is well known also that a 
species of the white shark, sometimes measuring 
sixty feet in length, has been found in the Medit- 
erranean which easily swallows a man whole, and 
many statements have been made as to the dis- 
covery of men who had been thus swallowed. 
Infidels once objected to the narrative because of 
the use of the word whale, as it seldom enters 
the Mediterranean Sea, and because the throat of 
some species is too small to swallow a man; but 
the fact is that neither in the Hebrew of the Old 
Testament nor in the Greek of the New has the 



JOXAH AXD HIS BOOK. 447 

word that limited meaning, the species of marine 
animal or sea-monster not being defined. A 
knowledge of Eastern peoples to-day shows how 
readily a whole community may be startled into 
sudden repentance, or at least panic, by the sol- 
emn announcement of a man believed to be a 
prophet. Cases are on record in which a Chris- 
tian priest startled a whole Mussulman town by 
declaring that he had received a divine commis- 
sion to announce a coming plague. Plainly there 
was no permanent reformation, no revival, no 
genuine conversion in the case of Nineveh. We 
know, too, that there was a vigorous trade between 
Syria and Tarshish in that early day. Reference 
is made in the Bible to the " ships of Tarshish," as 
we long spoke of East Indiamen ; as these in both 
cases were the greatest ships of their class. It 
* thus comes to pass that in all these incidental 
ways confirmation of the ancient narrative is 
found. 

It would not be at all surprising if natural law 
should yet show that the account of the swallow- 
ing of Jonah by a great fish is strictly scientific. 
Cases of catalepsy, hypnotism, ecstasy, and trance 
are almost equally mysterious. Cases of hiberna- 
tion and aestivation are quite as difficult of expla- 
nation. There are well-attested cases in which 
breathing nearly or entirely ceases. There is a 
Rocky Mountain squirrel whose temperature is 
only three degrees above the freezing-point dur- 
ing its winter sleep. The woodchuck and the 



448 OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

raccoon roll themselves into a ball and press their 
noses so tightly against their bodies that breath- 
ing is impossible. It is said also that the mar- 
mots pass into a state of such complete suspended 
animation that an electric shock will not arouse 
them, and the most deadly gases will not affect 
them in the least. Bats go to sleep in clusters, 
the central one often during- the entire winter bear- 
ing a weight of ten pounds. Bats have been sealed 
in glass jars, and the most careful tests have been 
made to see if any of the oxygen had been used, 
but there was no perceptible change in the air. 
The common garden snail covers the opening of 
its shell with a silky membrane which becomes 
encrusted with carbonate of lime, hermetically 
scaling the creature, which is without food, air, 
heat, or circulation. Cases are known in which 
it has been artificially sealed for three years, and 
then brought to life. There may be truth in the 
stories told of toads embedded in solid rocks and 
then brought to life. 

Human hibernation is equally mysterious. The 
fakirs in India may impose even on the most care- 
ful scientific men; but seemingly genuine cases 
of inexplicable hypnotism, or other unaccountable 
conditions, have occurred. Baird, in his treatise 
on the subject, published in 1850, tells of the case 
of a man in Lahore who was buried alive in 1837, 
in the presence of men determined to detect 
fraud, if any attempt to practise it were made, 
and who was long after dug up and restored to 



JONAH AND HIS BOOK, 449 

life. There are many things in heaven and earth 
not yet explicable by our philosophy. 

The character of Jonah is also consistent 
throughout the entire book which bears his name. 
The story is simple, straightforward, and striking- 
ly honest ; it is almost painfully frank in its state- 
ment of the faults of its subject and writer. It 
bears every evidence of being a truthful state- 
ment. We must not suppose from Jonah's at- 
tempt to flee from the presence of the Lord that 
he thought he could ever escape from God's 
sight ; he was too familiar with the truth as to 
God's presence to be guilty of such an error. We 
are rather to understand the language to mean 
that he was determined to go out from the pres- 
ence of the Lord as His servant and minister ; 
that is, that he determined to set aside his char- 
acter and office as a prophet of the Lord. He 
gives evidence that he possessed a petulant, quer- 
ulous disposition; indeed, he seems at times to 
have been afflicted almost with a species of insan- 
ity. This character of narrowness, petulance, 
querulousness, and hypochondria he maintains to 
the very last. We can easily see that he did not 
wish to be a prophet to the Ninevites, and his 
dislike of them and of his errand of mercy ap- 
pears to the close of the narrative. 

The Orientals have always had a high regard 
for Jonah. His tomb is shown with veneration 
near the ruins of Nineveh and also at Gath-Hep- 

her, which was the place of his birth. The Mo- 
29 



45° OLD TESTAMENT DIFFICULTIES. 

hammedans honor him greatly. It is a striking 
fact that an entire chapter in the Koran is in- 
scribed with his name. The difficulties con- 
nected with the book, which have so strongly in- 
fluenced the critics of the Occident, have never 
been influential in the minds of the people of the 
Orient. The book of Tobit recognized Jonah as 
an historacil character ; and this fact is significant 
as indicating current Jewish opinion on the sub- 
ject. The readers of Josephus know of the testi- 
mony of a similar purport which he bears to the 
historical character of Jonah. 

The book should be studied afresh. The chief 
purpose of the author was to teach great moral 
and spiritual lessons ; and such lessons our Lord 
taught us from the book. It shows God's for- 
giveness to a heathen city when its repentance 
became manifest. It shows that God cares not 
for the chosen nation alone, but for all men. 
Here are suggested large lessons of sympathy and 
love; here we see God's greatness and man's lit- 
tleness, God's patience and man's petulance, 
God's charity and man's cruelty. Let us study 
the book for its beauty as literature, its charm as 
a souvenir of a remote time and civilization, and 
especially as a revelation of divine love and 
mercy. Whatever interpretation we may give 
>me of its parts, its great lessons will stand, 
honored by the approval of Jesus Christ and com- 
mended by our sense of God's justice, mercy, truth 
and grace. 



1898 



Hit 



